People v. Estrada

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Estrada

238 A.D.2d 519, 657 N.Y.S.2d 935, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3969

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

DecidedApril 21, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 238 A.D.2d 519 (People v. Estrada) 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. Estrada, 238 A.D.2d 519, 657 N.Y.S.2d 935, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3969 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered July 19, 1991, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, assault in the first degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a [520]*520reasonable doubt. Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions, including those in his supplemental pro se brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review or do not warrant reversal. Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Thompson and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered July 19, 1991, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, assault in the first degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a [520]*520reasonable doubt. Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions, including those in his supplemental pro se brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review or do not warrant reversal. Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Thompson and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 A.D.2d 519, 657 N.Y.S.2d 935, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3969, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-estrada-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack