People v. Hulsen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hulsen

234 A.D.2d 389, 651 N.Y.S.2d 874, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12919

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

DecidedDecember 9, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 234 A.D.2d 389 (People v. Hulsen) 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. Hulsen, 234 A.D.2d 389, 651 N.Y.S.2d 874, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12919 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J.), rendered May 31, 1988, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

[390]*390The defendant contends that his conviction should be reversed because the testimony of his accomplice Francis Lendino was not reliably corroborated by other evidence. However, as we noted in affirming the conviction of the codefendant Joseph Hogan (People v Hogan, 172 AD2d 690), the testimony given by four other prosecution witnesses was sufficient to tend to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime (see, CPL 60.22), and therefore to corroborate accomplice Lendino’s testimony.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Friedmann and Krausman, 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 (Goldstein, J.), rendered May 31, 1988, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

[390]*390The defendant contends that his conviction should be reversed because the testimony of his accomplice Francis Lendino was not reliably corroborated by other evidence. However, as we noted in affirming the conviction of the codefendant Joseph Hogan (People v Hogan, 172 AD2d 690), the testimony given by four other prosecution witnesses was sufficient to tend to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime (see, CPL 60.22), and therefore to corroborate accomplice Lendino’s testimony.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

234 A.D.2d 389, 651 N.Y.S.2d 874, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12919, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hulsen-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack