People v. Mullins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mullins

13 A.D.3d 397, 785 N.Y.S.2d 537, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14866

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

DecidedDecember 6, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 13 A.D.3d 397 (People v. Mullins) 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. Mullins, 13 A.D.3d 397, 785 N.Y.S.2d 537, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14866 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (J. Goldberg, J.), rendered January 3, 2002, convicting him of manslaughter in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant waived his contention concerning the trial court’s submission of the crime of manslaughter in the second degree to the jury (see CPL 300.50 [1]; People v Dennis, 263 AD2d 618 [1999]; People v Wilson, 168 AD2d 696, 699 [1990]).

The defendant, allegedly one of several gunmen who shot and killed the victim, contends that his convictions were not supported by legally sufficient evidence because there was no evidence that he fired a gun during the incident. However, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), a rational jury could find that he did indeed fire a gun, as there was testimony from eyewitnesses describing a shooter that closely matched the defendant’s description.

The defendant’s remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]), without merit, or do not require reversal. Prudenti, P.J., H. Miller, Spolzino and Lifson, 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, Kings County (J. Goldberg, J.), rendered January 3, 2002, convicting him of manslaughter in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant waived his contention concerning the trial court’s submission of the crime of manslaughter in the second degree to the jury (see CPL 300.50 [1]; People v Dennis, 263 AD2d 618 [1999]; People v Wilson, 168 AD2d 696, 699 [1990]).

The defendant, allegedly one of several gunmen who shot and killed the victim, contends that his convictions were not supported by legally sufficient evidence because there was no evidence that he fired a gun during the incident. However, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), a rational jury could find that he did indeed fire a gun, as there was testimony from eyewitnesses describing a shooter that closely matched the defendant’s description.

The defendant’s remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]), without merit, or do not require reversal. Prudenti, P.J., H. Miller, Spolzino and Lifson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.3d 397, 785 N.Y.S.2d 537, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mullins-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack