People v. Kellam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Kellam

221 A.D.2d 989, 635 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13485

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

DecidedNovember 15, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 221 A.D.2d 989 (People v. Kellam) 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. Kellam, 221 A.D.2d 989, 635 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13485 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and attempted petit larceny. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, we conclude that it is sufficient to support defendant’s conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (see, People v Limpert, 186 AD2d 1005, lv denied 81 NY2d 764).

The sentence is not excessive in light of the circumstances of the crime and defendant’s extensive criminal history. We have reviewed the remaining issue advanced by defendant and conclude that it is without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Burke, J.—Criminal Possession Weapon, 3rd Degree.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Wesley, Callahan and Davis, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and attempted petit larceny. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, we conclude that it is sufficient to support defendant’s conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (see, People v Limpert, 186 AD2d 1005, lv denied 81 NY2d 764).

The sentence is not excessive in light of the circumstances of the crime and defendant’s extensive criminal history. We have reviewed the remaining issue advanced by defendant and conclude that it is without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Burke, J.—Criminal Possession Weapon, 3rd Degree.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Wesley, Callahan and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

221 A.D.2d 989, 635 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13485, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kellam-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack