People v. Lopez

6 A.D.3d 460, 773 N.Y.S.2d 886
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Lopez. Read the opinion of the Court — 283 A.D.2d 591

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Blumenfeld, J.), rendered April 8, 2002, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CEL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19 [1995]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CEL 470.15 [5]). Santucci, J.P., Krausman, Schmidt and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Lopez, 6 A.D.3d 460, 773 N.Y.S.2d 886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

6 A.D.3d 460 (People v. Lopez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Gray
652 N.E.2d 919 (New York Court of Appeals, 1995)
People v. Contes
454 N.E.2d 932 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)