People v. Heckstall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Heckstall

108 A.D.2d 757, 484 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43088

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

DecidedFebruary 4, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 108 A.D.2d 757 (People v. Heckstall) 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. Heckstall, 108 A.D.2d 757, 484 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43088 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ramirez, J.), rendered March 30, 1982, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, grand larceny in the third degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (People v Kennedy, 47 NY2d 196), the People sustained their burden of proving defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Defendant has not adequately preserved for appellate review his challenge to the charge to the jury and we decline to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice. Finally, the sentence imposed was appropriate and does not warrant modification. Lazer, J. P., Bracken, Rubin and Fiber, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ramirez, J.), rendered March 30, 1982, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, grand larceny in the third degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (People v Kennedy, 47 NY2d 196), the People sustained their burden of proving defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Defendant has not adequately preserved for appellate review his challenge to the charge to the jury and we decline to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice. Finally, the sentence imposed was appropriate and does not warrant modification. Lazer, J. P., Bracken, Rubin and Fiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 A.D.2d 757, 484 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43088, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-heckstall-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack