People v. Jon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jon

26 A.D.3d 245, 810 N.Y.S.2d 447

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

DecidedFebruary 16, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 26 A.D.3d 245 (People v. Jon) 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. Jon, 26 A.D.3d 245, 810 N.Y.S.2d 447 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William A. Wetzel, J.), rendered March 17, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of 11/2 to 41/2 years, and order, same court and Justice, entered on or about July 8, 2003, which denied defendant’s CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]).

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s CPL 440.10 motion without a hearing (see CPL 440.30 [4] [a], [b]). Although defendant claimed that his trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance by fading to call a particular witness, defendant’s moving papers gave no indication of the substance of the potential witness’s testimony (see People v Session, 34 NY2d 254 [1974]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, Gonzalez, Sweeny and McGuire, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William A. Wetzel, J.), rendered March 17, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of 11/2 to 41/2 years, and order, same court and Justice, entered on or about July 8, 2003, which denied defendant’s CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]).

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s CPL 440.10 motion without a hearing (see CPL 440.30 [4] [a], [b]). Although defendant claimed that his trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance by fading to call a particular witness, defendant’s moving papers gave no indication of the substance of the potential witness’s testimony (see People v Session, 34 NY2d 254 [1974]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, Gonzalez, Sweeny and McGuire, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.3d 245, 810 N.Y.S.2d 447, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jon-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack