People v. Mawhinney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mawhinney

241 A.D.2d 332, 659 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7044

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

DecidedJuly 1, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 241 A.D.2d 332 (People v. Mawhinney) 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. Mawhinney, 241 A.D.2d 332, 659 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7044 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.), rendered January 30, 1995, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of two counts of sodomy in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a persistent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The court’s verdict rejecting defendant’s affirmative defense of lack of criminal responsibility by reason of mental disease or defect (Penal Law § 40.15) was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). We see no reason to disturb the court’s evaluation (163 Misc 2d 329), under the statutory standard, of conflicting expert testimony.

The court properly exercised its discretion in adjudicating defendant a persistent felony offender. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ. [See, 163 Misc 2d 329.]

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.), rendered January 30, 1995, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of two counts of sodomy in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a persistent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The court’s verdict rejecting defendant’s affirmative defense of lack of criminal responsibility by reason of mental disease or defect (Penal Law § 40.15) was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). We see no reason to disturb the court’s evaluation (163 Misc 2d 329), under the statutory standard, of conflicting expert testimony.

The court properly exercised its discretion in adjudicating defendant a persistent felony offender. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ. [See, 163 Misc 2d 329.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

241 A.D.2d 332, 659 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7044, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mawhinney-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack