People v. Elliot

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Elliot

298 A.D.2d 290, 748 N.Y.S.2d 745, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10137

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 24, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 298 A.D.2d 290 (People v. Elliot) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Elliot, 298 A.D.2d 290, 748 N.Y.S.2d 745, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10137 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John Bradley, J.), rendered March 13, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of five years and three years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence established that defendant demanded money from the victim while waving a knife in the victim’s direction. The only reasonable explanation for defendant’s conduct was that he was attempting to effect a forcible larceny (see People v Harding, 243 AD2d 401, lv denied 91 NY2d 874). We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining arguments. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John Bradley, J.), rendered March 13, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of five years and three years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence established that defendant demanded money from the victim while waving a knife in the victim’s direction. The only reasonable explanation for defendant’s conduct was that he was attempting to effect a forcible larceny (see People v Harding, 243 AD2d 401, lv denied 91 NY2d 874). We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining arguments. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

298 A.D.2d 290, 748 N.Y.S.2d 745, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10137, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-elliot-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack