People v. Jourdan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jourdan

104 A.D.2d 1008, 481 N.Y.S.2d 4, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20441

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

DecidedOctober 22, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 104 A.D.2d 1008 (People v. Jourdan) 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. Jourdan, 104 A.D.2d 1008, 481 N.Y.S.2d 4, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20441 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kooper, J.), rendered December 2, 1981, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, sodomy in the first degree, and attempted rape in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt and there is no reason, on this record, to overturn the evaluations of credibility made by the jury (see People v Gruttola, 43 NY2d 116, 122). Nor was the court’s Sandoval ruling an abuse of discretion (see People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371, 377-378). The sentence imposed was appropriate (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Defendant’s remaining arguments either lack merit or were not properly preserved for review. Moflen, P. J., Lazer, Gibbons and Brown, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kooper, J.), rendered December 2, 1981, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, sodomy in the first degree, and attempted rape in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt and there is no reason, on this record, to overturn the evaluations of credibility made by the jury (see People v Gruttola, 43 NY2d 116, 122). Nor was the court’s Sandoval ruling an abuse of discretion (see People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371, 377-378). The sentence imposed was appropriate (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Defendant’s remaining arguments either lack merit or were not properly preserved for review. Moflen, P. J., Lazer, Gibbons and Brown, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A.D.2d 1008, 481 N.Y.S.2d 4, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20441, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jourdan-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack