People v. Fisher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fisher

161 A.D.2d 792, 558 N.Y.S.2d 851, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6699

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 29, 1990·Published

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Thorp, J.), rendered October 6, 1988, convicting him of criminal posses[793] sion of a forged instrument in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in a 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. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

Additionally, the defendant failed to make a prima facie showing that he was entitled to a missing witness charge, as he did not establish that the missing witness’s testimony would have been material (see, People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424; People v Leonardo, 151 AD2d 504). Bracken, J. P, Rubin, Rosenblatt and Miller, 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 County Court, Nassau County (Thorp, J.), rendered October 6, 1988, convicting him of criminal posses[793] sion of a forged instrument in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in a 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. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

Additionally, the defendant failed to make a prima facie showing that he was entitled to a missing witness charge, as he did not establish that the missing witness’s testimony would have been material (see, People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424; People v Leonardo, 151 AD2d 504). Bracken, J. P, Rubin, Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ, concur.

People v. Fisher, 161 A.D.2d 792, 558 N.Y.S.2d 851, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6699 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

161 A.D.2d 792 (People v. Fisher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related