People v. Moore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Moore

100 A.D.2d 521, 473 N.Y.S.2d 25, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17492

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

DecidedMarch 5, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 100 A.D.2d 521 (People v. Moore) 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. Moore, 100 A.D.2d 521, 473 N.Y.S.2d 25, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17492 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Cowhey, J.), rendered September 17, 1982, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence as a second felony offender. U Judgment affirmed. H The evidence at trial was sufficient in both quality and quantity to support the verdict. Issues of credibility were for the jury to resolve and we perceive no basis for overturning the verdict. H Defendant’s claim that he is entitled to summary reversal because of the stenographer’s delay in transcribing the minutes must be rejected (see People v Cousart, 58 NY2d 62). 11 We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Titone, Lazer and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Cowhey, J.), rendered September 17, 1982, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence as a second felony offender. U Judgment affirmed. H The evidence at trial was sufficient in both quality and quantity to support the verdict. Issues of credibility were for the jury to resolve and we perceive no basis for overturning the verdict. H Defendant’s claim that he is entitled to summary reversal because of the stenographer’s delay in transcribing the minutes must be rejected (see People v Cousart, 58 NY2d 62). 11 We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Titone, Lazer and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 A.D.2d 521, 473 N.Y.S.2d 25, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-moore-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack