People v. McLaren

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McLaren

252 A.D.2d 359, 675 N.Y.S.2d 536, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7933

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

DecidedJuly 2, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 252 A.D.2d 359 (People v. McLaren) 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. McLaren, 252 A.D.2d 359, 675 N.Y.S.2d 536, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7933 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald Zweibel, J.), rendered March 14, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 9 to 18 years, 7V2 to 15 years, and 3V2 to 7 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues concerning cred[360]*360ibility of witnesses and reliability of identification testimony were properly presented to the jury and we see no reason to disturb its determinations.

We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Nardelli, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald Zweibel, J.), rendered March 14, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 9 to 18 years, 7V2 to 15 years, and 3V2 to 7 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues concerning cred[360]*360ibility of witnesses and reliability of identification testimony were properly presented to the jury and we see no reason to disturb its determinations.

We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Nardelli, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 A.D.2d 359, 675 N.Y.S.2d 536, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7933, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mclaren-nyappdiv-1998.