People v. Holland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Holland

139 A.D.2d 593, 526 N.Y.S.2d 1011, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3869

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

DecidedApril 11, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 139 A.D.2d 593 (People v. Holland) 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. Holland, 139 A.D.2d 593, 526 N.Y.S.2d 1011, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3869 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Moskowitz, J.), rendered June 27, 1983, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

After viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to [594]*594the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the conviction. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]). We have considered the defendant’s other contentions, including those urged by the defendant in his supplemental pro se brief, and find them either to be unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Spatt and Harwood, 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, Kings County (Moskowitz, J.), rendered June 27, 1983, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

After viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to [594]*594the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the conviction. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]). We have considered the defendant’s other contentions, including those urged by the defendant in his supplemental pro se brief, and find them either to be unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Spatt and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 A.D.2d 593, 526 N.Y.S.2d 1011, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-holland-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack