People v. Medina

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Medina

237 A.D.2d 382, 655 N.Y.S.2d 430, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2281

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 10, 1997·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.), rendered September 19, 1994, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the evidence did not warrant a jury instruction on the defense of temporary and lawful possession of a weapon (see, People v Banks, 76 NY2d 799). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant (see, People v Butts, 72 NY2d 746, 750), there is no reasonable view of the evidence upon which the jury could have found that the defendant had a legal excuse for possessing the weapon and that he had not used it in a dangerous manner (see, People v Toribio, 216 AD2d 189; People v Kouvaras, 197 AD2d 638; People v Karim, 176 AD2d 670). The [383] uncontroverted evidence established that the defendant fired a gun several times at a crowd of people, injuring two of them. The evidence was thus " ' "utterly at odds” ’ ” with any genuine claim of innocent possession (People v Banks, supra, at 801; quoting People v Snyder, 73 NY2d 900, 902).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Goldstein, 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, Queens County (Clabby, J.), rendered September 19, 1994, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the evidence did not warrant a jury instruction on the defense of temporary and lawful possession of a weapon (see, People v Banks, 76 NY2d 799). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant (see, People v Butts, 72 NY2d 746, 750), there is no reasonable view of the evidence upon which the jury could have found that the defendant had a legal excuse for possessing the weapon and that he had not used it in a dangerous manner (see, People v Toribio, 216 AD2d 189; People v Kouvaras, 197 AD2d 638; People v Karim, 176 AD2d 670). The [383] uncontroverted evidence established that the defendant fired a gun several times at a crowd of people, injuring two of them. The evidence was thus " ' "utterly at odds” ’ ” with any genuine claim of innocent possession (People v Banks, supra, at 801; quoting People v Snyder, 73 NY2d 900, 902).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

People v. Medina, 237 A.D.2d 382, 655 N.Y.S.2d 430, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2281 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

237 A.D.2d 382 (People v. Medina) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related