People v. Hollins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hollins

278 A.D.2d 932, 718 N.Y.S.2d 922, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13410

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 27, 2000·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Contrary to defendant’s contention, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). “In a bench trial, no less than a jury trial, the resolution of credibility issues by the trier of fact and its determination of the weight to be accorded the evidence presented are entitled to great deference” (People v Van Akin, 197 AD2d 845). (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Maloy, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Hayes, Wisner, Scudder and Lawton, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Contrary to defendant’s contention, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). “In a bench trial, no less than a jury trial, the resolution of credibility issues by the trier of fact and its determination of the weight to be accorded the evidence presented are entitled to great deference” (People v Van Akin, 197 AD2d 845). (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Maloy, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Hayes, Wisner, Scudder and Lawton, JJ.

People v. Hollins, 278 A.D.2d 932, 718 N.Y.S.2d 922, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13410 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

278 A.D.2d 932 (People v. Hollins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related