People v. Mc Carthy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mc Carthy

28 A.D.3d 1115, 813 N.Y.S.2d 321

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

DecidedApril 28, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 28 A.D.3d 1115 (People v. Mc Carthy) 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. Mc Carthy, 28 A.D.3d 1115, 813 N.Y.S.2d 321 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (Craig J. Doran, J.), rendered December 7, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree and petit larceny.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.25) and petit larceny (§ 155.25). By failing to renew her motion to dismiss the [1116]*1116indictment after presenting evidence, defendant failed to preserve for our review her contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (see People v Hines, 97 NY2d 56, 61 [2001], rearg denied 97 NY2d 678 [2001]; People v Williams, 17 AD3d 1043, 1045 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 811 [2005]). Contrary to the further contentions of defendant, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]), and she received meaningful representation (see generally People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]). Defendant’s remaining contentions are not preserved for our review (see CPL 470.05 [2]) and, in any event, those contentions lack merit. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Kehoe and Hayes, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (Craig J. Doran, J.), rendered December 7, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree and petit larceny.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.25) and petit larceny (§ 155.25). By failing to renew her motion to dismiss the [1116]*1116indictment after presenting evidence, defendant failed to preserve for our review her contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (see People v Hines, 97 NY2d 56, 61 [2001], rearg denied 97 NY2d 678 [2001]; People v Williams, 17 AD3d 1043, 1045 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 811 [2005]). Contrary to the further contentions of defendant, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]), and she received meaningful representation (see generally People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]). Defendant’s remaining contentions are not preserved for our review (see CPL 470.05 [2]) and, in any event, those contentions lack merit. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Kehoe and Hayes, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 A.D.3d 1115, 813 N.Y.S.2d 321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mc-carthy-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack