People v. Millwood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Millwood

270 A.D.2d 54, 704 N.Y.S.2d 814, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2603

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

DecidedMarch 9, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 270 A.D.2d 54 (People v. Millwood) 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. Millwood, 270 A.D.2d 54, 704 N.Y.S.2d 814, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2603 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered November 8, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, 4V2 to 9 years, and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning identification and credibility. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Ellerin, Lerner and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered November 8, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, 4V2 to 9 years, and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning identification and credibility. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Ellerin, Lerner and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D.2d 54, 704 N.Y.S.2d 814, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2603, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-millwood-nyappdiv-2000.