People v. McKithan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McKithan

261 A.D.2d 154, 687 N.Y.S.2d 262, 690 N.Y.S.2d 195, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4655

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

DecidedMay 6, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 261 A.D.2d 154 (People v. McKithan) 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. McKithan, 261 A.D.2d 154, 687 N.Y.S.2d 262, 690 N.Y.S.2d 195, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4655 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Frank Torres, J.), rendered July 15, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the second degree and attempted robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Identification and credibility issues were properly presented to the jury and we see no reason to disturb its findings. The court’s charge as a whole conveyed the appropriate standards regarding reasonable doubt (see, People v Cubino, 88 NY2d 998; People v Fields, 87 NY2d 821). We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. Concur — Williams, J. P., Rubin, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Frank Torres, J.), rendered July 15, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the second degree and attempted robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Identification and credibility issues were properly presented to the jury and we see no reason to disturb its findings. The court’s charge as a whole conveyed the appropriate standards regarding reasonable doubt (see, People v Cubino, 88 NY2d 998; People v Fields, 87 NY2d 821). We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. Concur — Williams, J. P., Rubin, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 154, 687 N.Y.S.2d 262, 690 N.Y.S.2d 195, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mckithan-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack