People v. Mathison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mathison

41 A.D.3d 736, 836 N.Y.S.2d 882

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

DecidedJune 19, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 41 A.D.3d 736 (People v. Mathison) 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. Mathison, 41 A.D.3d 736, 836 N.Y.S.2d 882 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the de- [737]*737fendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brennan, J.), rendered September 9, 2003, convicting him of assault in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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. Resolution of issues of credibility is primarily a matter to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses, and its determination should be accorded great deference on appeal (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 644-645 [2006]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]). Upon the exercise of our factual review power (see CPL 470.15 [5]), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, supra).

The defendant’s remaining contentions either are without merit or do not require reversal. Rivera, J.P., Spolzino, Florio and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the de- [737]*737fendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brennan, J.), rendered September 9, 2003, convicting him of assault in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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. Resolution of issues of credibility is primarily a matter to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses, and its determination should be accorded great deference on appeal (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 644-645 [2006]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]). Upon the exercise of our factual review power (see CPL 470.15 [5]), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, supra).

The defendant’s remaining contentions either are without merit or do not require reversal. Rivera, J.P., Spolzino, Florio and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.3d 736, 836 N.Y.S.2d 882, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mathison-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack