People v. Michaels

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Michaels

301 A.D.2d 366, 752 N.Y.S.2d 854, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60

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

DecidedJanuary 7, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 301 A.D.2d 366 (People v. Michaels) 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. Michaels, 301 A.D.2d 366, 752 N.Y.S.2d 854, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Visitacion-Lewis, J.), rendered November 1, 2000, convicting defendant, after jury trial, of grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence clearly warranted the conclusion that defendant was a participant in the crime, whose role was to distract the victim while defendant’s companion picked the victim’s pocket.

The court properly exercised its discretion in receiving testimony from a well-qualified expert on pickpocketing techniques (see People v Right, 180 AD2d 430, lv denied 79 NY2d 952). Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Rosenberger and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Visitacion-Lewis, J.), rendered November 1, 2000, convicting defendant, after jury trial, of grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence clearly warranted the conclusion that defendant was a participant in the crime, whose role was to distract the victim while defendant’s companion picked the victim’s pocket.

The court properly exercised its discretion in receiving testimony from a well-qualified expert on pickpocketing techniques (see People v Right, 180 AD2d 430, lv denied 79 NY2d 952). Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Rosenberger and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 A.D.2d 366, 752 N.Y.S.2d 854, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-michaels-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack