People v. Murtaugh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Murtaugh

49 A.D.3d 1242, 852 N.Y.2d 879

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

DecidedMarch 14, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A.D.3d 1242 (People v. Murtaugh) 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. Murtaugh, 49 A.D.3d 1242, 852 N.Y.2d 879 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting her upon a jury verdict of two counts each of forgery in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.10 [1]) and petit larceny (§ 155.25), defendant challenges the sufficiency of the factual allegations supporting the forgery counts in the indictment (see CPL 200.50 [7]). Defendant failed to preserve that challenge for our review (see People v lannone, 45 NY2d 589, 600 [1978]; People v Soto, 44 NY2d 683, 684 [1978]), and we decline to exercise our power to review it as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice [1243]*1243(see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). The verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Present—Smith, J.P., Centra, Fahey, Peradotto and Green, JJ.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting her upon a jury verdict of two counts each of forgery in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.10 [1]) and petit larceny (§ 155.25), defendant challenges the sufficiency of the factual allegations supporting the forgery counts in the indictment (see CPL 200.50 [7]). Defendant failed to preserve that challenge for our review (see People v lannone, 45 NY2d 589, 600 [1978]; People v Soto, 44 NY2d 683, 684 [1978]), and we decline to exercise our power to review it as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice [1243]*1243(see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). The verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Present—Smith, J.P., Centra, Fahey, Peradotto and Green, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.3d 1242, 852 N.Y.2d 879, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-murtaugh-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack