People v. Marabell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Marabell

287 A.D.2d 338, 731 N.Y.S.2d 377

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

DecidedOctober 18, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 287 A.D.2d 338 (People v. Marabell) 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. Marabell, 287 A.D.2d 338, 731 N.Y.S.2d 377 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Dorothy Cropper, J.), rendered March 15, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). Issues of identification and credibility, including the weight to be given to inconsistencies in testimony, were properly considered by the trier of facts and there is no basis upon which to disturb its determinations. We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining contentions. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Williams, Tom, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Dorothy Cropper, J.), rendered March 15, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). Issues of identification and credibility, including the weight to be given to inconsistencies in testimony, were properly considered by the trier of facts and there is no basis upon which to disturb its determinations. We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining contentions. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Williams, Tom, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 A.D.2d 338, 731 N.Y.S.2d 377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-marabell-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack