People v. Maiorano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Maiorano

264 A.D.2d 448, 693 N.Y.S.2d 451, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8669

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

DecidedAugust 16, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 264 A.D.2d 448 (People v. Maiorano) 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. Maiorano, 264 A.D.2d 448, 693 N.Y.S.2d 451, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8669 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Kelly, J.), rendered June 28, 1996, convicting him of reckless endangerment in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the People failed to prove that he recklessly started a fire in a high school auditorium by throwing a lighted cigar into a trash can is without merit. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was [449]*449legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Further, 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 sentence is not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Goldstein and McGinity, 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 County Court, Rockland County (Kelly, J.), rendered June 28, 1996, convicting him of reckless endangerment in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the People failed to prove that he recklessly started a fire in a high school auditorium by throwing a lighted cigar into a trash can is without merit. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was [449]*449legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Further, 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 sentence is not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 448, 693 N.Y.S.2d 451, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8669, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-maiorano-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack