People v. Gonzalez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gonzalez

102 A.D.3d 470, 956 N.Y.S.2d 888

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

DecidedJanuary 10, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 102 A.D.3d 470 (People v. Gonzalez) 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. Gonzalez, 102 A.D.3d 470, 956 N.Y.S.2d 888 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Analisa Torres, J.), rendered June 7, 2010, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the third degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of SVa to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations, including its evaluation of inconsistencies between the victim’s [471]*471testimony and his prior statements, or the jury’s finding that defendant intended to permanently deprive the victim of his property.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Acosta, Abdus-Salaam and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Analisa Torres, J.), rendered June 7, 2010, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the third degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of SVa to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations, including its evaluation of inconsistencies between the victim’s [471]*471testimony and his prior statements, or the jury’s finding that defendant intended to permanently deprive the victim of his property.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Acosta, Abdus-Salaam and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

102 A.D.3d 470, 956 N.Y.S.2d 888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gonzalez-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack