People v. Kricfalusi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Kricfalusi

291 A.D.2d 907, 738 N.Y.S.2d 270, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1149

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

DecidedFebruary 1, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 291 A.D.2d 907 (People v. Kricfalusi) 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. Kricfalusi, 291 A.D.2d 907, 738 N.Y.S.2d 270, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1149 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of Genesee County Court (Noonan, J.), entered January 8, 2001, convicting defendant after a jury trial of, inter alia, assault in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that the evidence is legally insufficient to support his conviction of assault in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.00 [3]). The People presented proof that defendant was operating a large commercial vehicle on a wet road in excess of the posted speed limit while his ability to operate the vehicle was impaired by alcohol. That proof is sufficient to establish that defendant acted with criminal negligence (see, People v Brown, 215 AD2d 573, 574, lv denied 86 NY2d 780; People v Hess, 140 AD2d 895, lv denied 72 NY2d 957; see also, People v Loughlin, 76 NY2d 804, 807). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Hayes, Scudder and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from a judgment of Genesee County Court (Noonan, J.), entered January 8, 2001, convicting defendant after a jury trial of, inter alia, assault in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that the evidence is legally insufficient to support his conviction of assault in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.00 [3]). The People presented proof that defendant was operating a large commercial vehicle on a wet road in excess of the posted speed limit while his ability to operate the vehicle was impaired by alcohol. That proof is sufficient to establish that defendant acted with criminal negligence (see, People v Brown, 215 AD2d 573, 574, lv denied 86 NY2d 780; People v Hess, 140 AD2d 895, lv denied 72 NY2d 957; see also, People v Loughlin, 76 NY2d 804, 807). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Hayes, Scudder and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 A.D.2d 907, 738 N.Y.S.2d 270, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kricfalusi-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack