People v. Neptune

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Neptune

235 A.D.2d 502, 652 N.Y.S.2d 991, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 375

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 21, 1997·Published

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerges, J.), rendered November 15, 1994, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the People failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the prosecution witnesses accurately and reliably identified him as the perpetrator. However, the defendant’s motion to dismiss for the failure to prove a prima facie case was not sufficiently specific to preserve this claim for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Johnson, 185 AD2d 247). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt 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 (CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), without merit, or do not require reversal. Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and Goldstein, 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 (Gerges, J.), rendered November 15, 1994, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the People failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the prosecution witnesses accurately and reliably identified him as the perpetrator. However, the defendant’s motion to dismiss for the failure to prove a prima facie case was not sufficiently specific to preserve this claim for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Johnson, 185 AD2d 247). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt 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 (CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), without merit, or do not require reversal. Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

People v. Neptune, 235 A.D.2d 502, 652 N.Y.S.2d 991, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 375 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

235 A.D.2d 502 (People v. Neptune) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related