Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/People v. Harvey

People v. Harvey

2020 NY Slip Op 4488, 186 A.D.3d 622, 126 N.Y.S.3d 678
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedAugust 12, 2020
DocketInd. No. 17-00057
StatusPublished

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 4488 (People v. Harvey) 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. Harvey, 2020 NY Slip Op 4488, 186 A.D.3d 622, 126 N.Y.S.3d 678 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

People v Harvey (2020 NY Slip Op 04488)
People v Harvey
2020 NY Slip Op 04488
Decided on August 12, 2020
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on August 12, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, J.P.
SHERI S. ROMAN
JEFFREY A. COHEN
ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.

2017-11102
(Ind. No. 17-00057)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Jacques Harvey, appellant.


Matthew C. Hug, Albany, NY, for appellant.

David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Middletown, NY (William C. Ghee of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Craig Stephen Brown, J.), rendered September 25, 2017, convicting him of promoting prison contraband in the first degree and promoting prison contraband in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, 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), and drawing all reasonable inferences in the People's favor (see People v Gordon, 23 NY3d 643, 649; People v Delamota, 18 NY3d 107, 113; People v Ford, 66 NY2d 428, 437), we find that the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of promoting prison contraband in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 205.25[2]; 205.00[4]) and promoting prison contraband in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 205.20[2]; 205.00[3]) beyond a reasonable doubt.

Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15[5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

LEVENTHAL, J.P., ROMAN, COHEN and MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Mateo
811 N.E.2d 1053 (New York Court of Appeals, 2004)
People v. Danielson
880 N.E.2d 1 (New York Court of Appeals, 2007)
People v. Romero
859 N.E.2d 902 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Delamota
960 N.E.2d 383 (New York Court of Appeals, 2011)
People v. Gordon
16 N.E.3d 1178 (New York Court of Appeals, 2014)
People v. Contes
454 N.E.2d 932 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
People v. Ford
488 N.E.2d 458 (New York Court of Appeals, 1985)
People v. Bleakley
508 N.E.2d 672 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 4488, 186 A.D.3d 622, 126 N.Y.S.3d 678, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-harvey-nyappdiv-2020.