People v. Holloway

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Holloway

282 A.D.2d 758, 724 N.Y.S.2d 345, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4246

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

DecidedApril 30, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 282 A.D.2d 758 (People v. Holloway) 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. Holloway, 282 A.D.2d 758, 724 N.Y.S.2d 345, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4246 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowling, J.), rendered August 5, 1997, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt of the crimes for which he was convicted is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d [759]*759620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or do not warrant reversal. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, McGinity and H. Miller, 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 (Dowling, J.), rendered August 5, 1997, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt of the crimes for which he was convicted is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d [759]*759620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or do not warrant reversal. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, McGinity and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D.2d 758, 724 N.Y.S.2d 345, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-holloway-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack