People v. Jarman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jarman

279 A.D.2d 275, 718 N.Y.S.2d 829, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 138

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

DecidedJanuary 9, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 279 A.D.2d 275 (People v. Jarman) 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. Jarman, 279 A.D.2d 275, 718 N.Y.S.2d 829, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 138 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Carruthers, J.), rendered May 12, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 3V2 to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence. The People established a suitable chain of custody verifying that a latent fingerprint belonging to defendant was the same fingerprint that a police officer had lifted from a filing cabinet inside the burglarized premises. The alleged defects in the [276]*276chain of custody were not significant enough to affect the admissibility of the fingerprint evidence (see, People v Julian, 41 NY2d 340). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Williams, Tom, Saxe and Friedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Carruthers, J.), rendered May 12, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 3V2 to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence. The People established a suitable chain of custody verifying that a latent fingerprint belonging to defendant was the same fingerprint that a police officer had lifted from a filing cabinet inside the burglarized premises. The alleged defects in the [276]*276chain of custody were not significant enough to affect the admissibility of the fingerprint evidence (see, People v Julian, 41 NY2d 340). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Williams, Tom, Saxe and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 A.D.2d 275, 718 N.Y.S.2d 829, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jarman-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack