People v. Miley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Miley

12 A.D.3d 461, 783 N.Y.S.2d 851, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13286

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

DecidedNovember 8, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 12 A.D.3d 461 (People v. Miley) 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. Miley, 12 A.D.3d 461, 783 N.Y.S.2d 851, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13286 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Brown, J.), rendered January 15, 2004, convicting him of criminally negligent homicide (two counts) and driving while impaired, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the evidence was legally insufficient to find him guilty of criminally negligent homicide since the People failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his impairment due to alcohol caused the subject motor vehicle collision. However, this claim is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]; People v Chata, 8 AD3d 674, 675 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 672 [2004]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s [462]*462guilt of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt. 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]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or do not require reversal. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Cozier and Rivera, 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 County Court, Nassau County (Brown, J.), rendered January 15, 2004, convicting him of criminally negligent homicide (two counts) and driving while impaired, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the evidence was legally insufficient to find him guilty of criminally negligent homicide since the People failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his impairment due to alcohol caused the subject motor vehicle collision. However, this claim is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]; People v Chata, 8 AD3d 674, 675 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 672 [2004]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s [462]*462guilt of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt. 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]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or do not require reversal. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.3d 461, 783 N.Y.S.2d 851, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13286, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-miley-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack