People v. Lewis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lewis

90 A.D.2d 814, 455 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19050

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

DecidedNovember 15, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 90 A.D.2d 814 (People v. Lewis) 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. Lewis, 90 A.D.2d 814, 455 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19050 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Savarese, J.), rendered September 2, 1980, convicting him of rape in the first degree and sodomy in the first degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. The defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The accomplice Edmonds’ testimony was amply corroborated by the two statements defendant gave to the police. Defendant initially denied that he was present at the scene of the crime and asserted a false alibi. He later admitted that he was present and witnessed the crime, but denied that he had touched the victim. These conflicting, exculpatory statements satisfied the statutory requirement for other evidence “tending to connect the defendant with the commission of [the] offensefs]” (see CPL 60.22, subd 1; People v Burgin, 40 NY2d 953; People v Deitsch, 237 NY 300, 303). Titone, J. P., Gulotta, O’Connor and Niehoff, 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, Queens County (Savarese, J.), rendered September 2, 1980, convicting him of rape in the first degree and sodomy in the first degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. The defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The accomplice Edmonds’ testimony was amply corroborated by the two statements defendant gave to the police. Defendant initially denied that he was present at the scene of the crime and asserted a false alibi. He later admitted that he was present and witnessed the crime, but denied that he had touched the victim. These conflicting, exculpatory statements satisfied the statutory requirement for other evidence “tending to connect the defendant with the commission of [the] offensefs]” (see CPL 60.22, subd 1; People v Burgin, 40 NY2d 953; People v Deitsch, 237 NY 300, 303). Titone, J. P., Gulotta, O’Connor and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 A.D.2d 814, 455 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19050, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lewis-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack