People v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jones

200 A.D.2d 383, 608 N.Y.S.2d 80, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 99

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

DecidedJanuary 6, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 200 A.D.2d 383 (People v. Jones) 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. Jones, 200 A.D.2d 383, 608 N.Y.S.2d 80, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 99 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jay Gold, J.), rendered December 10, 1991, which convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree and sentenced him to a term of 4 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in a light most favorable to the prosecution and giving it the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v Malizia, 62 NY2d 755, cert denied 469 US 932), the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. The People proved that defendant stabbed the victim in the neck and his intent to cause serious physical injury was readily inferrable from his actions. (People v Bracey, 41 NY2d 296, 301.) Moreover, upon an independent review of the facts, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490.) Furthermore, the evidence was legally sufficient to disprove defendant’s justifica[384]*384tion defense beyond a reasonable doubt. In this regard, the jury’s determinations regarding credibility and the proffered defense were supported by the record. (People v Vladymir G., 194 AD2d 391.)

Defendant’s claim that the court erred in denying his motion to set aside the verdict without a hearing on the basis that racial prejudice allegedly played a significant role during the jury’s deliberations is unpreserved as defendant never requested a hearing on this issue. Nor did defendant’s motion allege that the verdict was tainted by racial prejudice. In any event, the claim of racial prejudice is utterly without support.

The court did not abuse its discretion in imposing sentence. (People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302, 305.) Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger and Wallach, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jay Gold, J.), rendered December 10, 1991, which convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree and sentenced him to a term of 4 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in a light most favorable to the prosecution and giving it the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v Malizia, 62 NY2d 755, cert denied 469 US 932), the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. The People proved that defendant stabbed the victim in the neck and his intent to cause serious physical injury was readily inferrable from his actions. (People v Bracey, 41 NY2d 296, 301.) Moreover, upon an independent review of the facts, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490.) Furthermore, the evidence was legally sufficient to disprove defendant’s justifica[384]*384tion defense beyond a reasonable doubt. In this regard, the jury’s determinations regarding credibility and the proffered defense were supported by the record. (People v Vladymir G., 194 AD2d 391.)

Defendant’s claim that the court erred in denying his motion to set aside the verdict without a hearing on the basis that racial prejudice allegedly played a significant role during the jury’s deliberations is unpreserved as defendant never requested a hearing on this issue. Nor did defendant’s motion allege that the verdict was tainted by racial prejudice. In any event, the claim of racial prejudice is utterly without support.

The court did not abuse its discretion in imposing sentence. (People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302, 305.) Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger and Wallach, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 A.D.2d 383, 608 N.Y.S.2d 80, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 99, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jones-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack