People v. Durda

265 A.D.2d 824, 696 N.Y.S.2d 609, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9862
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 1, 1999·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Upon remittitur to Supreme Court for a reconstruction hearing (People v Durda, 259 AD2d 996), the court properly determined, based upon the testimony adduced at the hearing (see, People v Alomar, 93 NY2d 239), that the People’s Ventimiglia application was decided on papers alone and that no off-the-record proceeding occurred. We conclude, therefore, that the People met their burden at the reconstruction hearing of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant was not denied the right to be present at a Ventimiglia proceeding (see, People v Terry, 225 AD2d 1058, lv denied 88 NY2d 886). We further conclude that the verdict is based upon sufficient evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). (Resubmission of Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Burns, J. — Criminal Possession Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present — Hayes, J. P., Wisner, Pigott, Jr., Scudder and Callahan, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

People v. Durda, 265 A.D.2d 824, 696 N.Y.S.2d 609, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9862 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

265 A.D.2d 824 (People v. Durda) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

WALKER, FREDERICK E., PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
People v. Walker
117 A.D.3d 1578 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)