People v. Long

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Long

238 A.D.2d 606, 657 N.Y.S.2d 959

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 28, 1997·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.), rendered April 13, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, rape in the first degree, and sexual abuse in the [607] first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the complainant was mistaken in identifying him as her attacker is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Johnson, 212 AD2d 807, affd 87 NY2d 1006; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Mangano, P. J., Pizzuto, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.), rendered April 13, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, rape in the first degree, and sexual abuse in the [607] first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the complainant was mistaken in identifying him as her attacker is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Johnson, 212 AD2d 807, affd 87 NY2d 1006; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Mangano, P. J., Pizzuto, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

People v. Long, 238 A.D.2d 606, 657 N.Y.S.2d 959 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

238 A.D.2d 606 (People v. Long) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related