People v. Fluker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fluker

2 A.D.3d 648, 768 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1 A.D.2d 541, 767 N.Y.S.2d 259

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

DecidedDecember 15, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2 A.D.3d 648 (People v. Fluker) 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. Fluker, 2 A.D.3d 648, 768 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1 A.D.2d 541, 767 N.Y.S.2d 259 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kreindler, J.), rendered May 15, 2002, convicting him of assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19-20 [1995]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 250 [1989]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt of assault in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt (see Penal Law 120.05 [2]). The defendant participated in an attack with several accomplices. He restrained the victim while his accomplices, armed with blades, slashed her head, inflicting a 13-inch scalp laceration requiring 25 staples, and cut her face and lip, which required sutures. The defendant also cut the victim above the right buttock with a sharp object. Moreover, 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 sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Altman, Smith and Crane, 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 (Kreindler, J.), rendered May 15, 2002, convicting him of assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19-20 [1995]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 250 [1989]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt of assault in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt (see Penal Law 120.05 [2]). The defendant participated in an attack with several accomplices. He restrained the victim while his accomplices, armed with blades, slashed her head, inflicting a 13-inch scalp laceration requiring 25 staples, and cut her face and lip, which required sutures. The defendant also cut the victim above the right buttock with a sharp object. Moreover, 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 sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Altman, Smith and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 A.D.3d 648, 768 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1 A.D.2d 541, 767 N.Y.S.2d 259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fluker-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack