People v. Francis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Francis

211 A.D.2d 812, 621 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 640

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

DecidedJanuary 30, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 211 A.D.2d 812 (People v. Francis) 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. Francis, 211 A.D.2d 812, 621 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 640 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Harkavy, J.), both rendered November 17, 1992, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree under Indictment No. 1294/92, upon a jury verdict, and attempted robbery in the first degree under Indictment No. 11868/91, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual [813]*813review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions regarding his convictions under both indictments, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, O’Brien and Altman, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Harkavy, J.), both rendered November 17, 1992, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree under Indictment No. 1294/92, upon a jury verdict, and attempted robbery in the first degree under Indictment No. 11868/91, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual [813]*813review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions regarding his convictions under both indictments, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, O’Brien and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 A.D.2d 812, 621 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-francis-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack