People v. Hardeen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hardeen

275 A.D.2d 750, 713 N.Y.S.2d 497, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9244

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

DecidedSeptember 18, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 750 (People v. Hardeen) 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. Hardeen, 275 A.D.2d 750, 713 N.Y.S.2d 497, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9244 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cooperman, J.), rendered April 27, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that his conviction is not supported by legally sufficient evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Johnson, 270 AD2d 431). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Johnson, supra). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The sentence imposed is not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). S. Miller, J. P., Friedmann, Luciano and Schmidt, 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 (Cooperman, J.), rendered April 27, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that his conviction is not supported by legally sufficient evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Johnson, 270 AD2d 431). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Johnson, supra). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The sentence imposed is not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). S. Miller, J. P., Friedmann, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 750, 713 N.Y.S.2d 497, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hardeen-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack