People v. Grays

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Grays

209 A.D.2d 637, 619 N.Y.S.2d 664

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

DecidedNovember 21, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 209 A.D.2d 637 (People v. Grays) 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. Grays, 209 A.D.2d 637, 619 N.Y.S.2d 664 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered April 16, 1993, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the 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 beyond a reasonable doubt. Although there were inconsistencies between the complainant’s testimony at the trial and the complainant’s statements to the police, they were not so great as to render his testimony incredible as a matter of law (see, People v Jordan, 181 AD2d 745; People v Haynes, 175 AD2d 929; People v Reina, 131 AD2d 517). 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]; People v Sutton, 108 AD2d 942). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Friedmann and Goldstein, 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, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered April 16, 1993, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the 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 beyond a reasonable doubt. Although there were inconsistencies between the complainant’s testimony at the trial and the complainant’s statements to the police, they were not so great as to render his testimony incredible as a matter of law (see, People v Jordan, 181 AD2d 745; People v Haynes, 175 AD2d 929; People v Reina, 131 AD2d 517). 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]; People v Sutton, 108 AD2d 942). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 637, 619 N.Y.S.2d 664, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-grays-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack