People v. McCrae

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McCrae

1 A.D.2d 612, 767 N.Y.S.2d 664, 1 A.D.3d 612, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12464

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

DecidedNovember 24, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 1 A.D.2d 612 (People v. McCrae) 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. McCrae, 1 A.D.2d 612, 767 N.Y.S.2d 664, 1 A.D.3d 612, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12464 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), rendered November 27, 2001, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not deprived of his right to be present at a particular sidebar conference, as the conference concerned purely legal matters (see People v DePallo, 96 NY2d 437 [2001]; People v Rodriguez, 85 NY2d 586, 590-591 [1995]; People v Polite, 291 AD2d 511 [2002]).

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt of the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245 [1989]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecu[613]*613tion (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 (see Penal Law § 265.15 [4]; People v Topsy, 265 AD2d 353 [1999]; People v Steward, 213 AD2d 570 [1995]; People v Bumbury, 194 AD2d 735 [1993]; People v Gillespie, 168 AD2d 567 [1990]; People v Wooten, 149 AD2d 751 [1989]; People v Carrion, 136 AD2d 649 [1988]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Steward, supra).

The defendant’s contention that the sentencing court improperly considered charges of which he was acquitted as a basis for imposing sentence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Emmanus, 300 AD2d 504 [2002]), and, in any event, is without merit (see People v Robinson, 250 AD2d 629 [1998]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Townes and Cozier, 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 Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), rendered November 27, 2001, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not deprived of his right to be present at a particular sidebar conference, as the conference concerned purely legal matters (see People v DePallo, 96 NY2d 437 [2001]; People v Rodriguez, 85 NY2d 586, 590-591 [1995]; People v Polite, 291 AD2d 511 [2002]).

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt of the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245 [1989]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecu[613]*613tion (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 (see Penal Law § 265.15 [4]; People v Topsy, 265 AD2d 353 [1999]; People v Steward, 213 AD2d 570 [1995]; People v Bumbury, 194 AD2d 735 [1993]; People v Gillespie, 168 AD2d 567 [1990]; People v Wooten, 149 AD2d 751 [1989]; People v Carrion, 136 AD2d 649 [1988]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Steward, supra).

The defendant’s contention that the sentencing court improperly considered charges of which he was acquitted as a basis for imposing sentence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Emmanus, 300 AD2d 504 [2002]), and, in any event, is without merit (see People v Robinson, 250 AD2d 629 [1998]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Townes and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.2d 612, 767 N.Y.S.2d 664, 1 A.D.3d 612, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mccrae-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack