People v. Gaither

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gaither

40 A.D.3d 878, 834 N.Y.S.2d 487

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

DecidedMay 15, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.D.3d 878 (People v. Gaither) 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. Gaither, 40 A.D.3d 878, 834 N.Y.S.2d 487 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered November 8, 2004, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the evidence adduced at trial, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), was legally sufficient to disprove his defense of justification beyond a reasonable doubt (see Penal Law § 35.15 [2] [a]; People v Spencer, 2 AD3d 545 [2003]; People v Pizarro, 297 AD2d 826 [2002]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power (see CPL 470.15 [5]), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

[879]*879The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Spolzino, J.E, Fisher, Covello and McCarthy, 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 November 8, 2004, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the evidence adduced at trial, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), was legally sufficient to disprove his defense of justification beyond a reasonable doubt (see Penal Law § 35.15 [2] [a]; People v Spencer, 2 AD3d 545 [2003]; People v Pizarro, 297 AD2d 826 [2002]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power (see CPL 470.15 [5]), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

[879]*879The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Spolzino, J.E, Fisher, Covello and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.3d 878, 834 N.Y.S.2d 487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gaither-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack