People v. Hakeem

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hakeem

262 A.D.2d 129, 690 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6743

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

DecidedJune 15, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D.2d 129 (People v. Hakeem) 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. Hakeem, 262 A.D.2d 129, 690 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6743 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Patricia Williams, J.), rendered July 28, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning identification and credibility.

[130]*130The court’s identification charge, read as a whole (see, People v Gomez, 226 AD2d 296, lv denied 88 NY2d 936), fairly instructed the jury on the correct principles of law to be applied to the case, and neither usurped the fact-finding function of the jury nor conveyed any opinion concerning the merits of the defense of misidentification. We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Tom, Rubin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Patricia Williams, J.), rendered July 28, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning identification and credibility.

[130]*130The court’s identification charge, read as a whole (see, People v Gomez, 226 AD2d 296, lv denied 88 NY2d 936), fairly instructed the jury on the correct principles of law to be applied to the case, and neither usurped the fact-finding function of the jury nor conveyed any opinion concerning the merits of the defense of misidentification. We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Tom, Rubin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D.2d 129, 690 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6743, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hakeem-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack