People v. Norwood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Norwood

269 A.D.2d 609, 704 N.Y.S.2d 826, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2319

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

DecidedFebruary 28, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 269 A.D.2d 609 (People v. Norwood) 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. Norwood, 269 A.D.2d 609, 704 N.Y.S.2d 826, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2319 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.), rendered September 23, 1998, convicting him of murder in the second degree, robbery in the first degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree, and criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court’s charge on reasonable doubt, when read as a whole, did not shift the burden of proof (see, People v Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247). Further, the trial court properly admitted photographs of the victim’s body, in light of the conflicting testimony regarding how the murder occurred (see, People v Webster, 248 AD2d 738, 739). Thompson, J. P., Feuerstein, Schmidt and Smith, 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 (Marrus, J.), rendered September 23, 1998, convicting him of murder in the second degree, robbery in the first degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree, and criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court’s charge on reasonable doubt, when read as a whole, did not shift the burden of proof (see, People v Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247). Further, the trial court properly admitted photographs of the victim’s body, in light of the conflicting testimony regarding how the murder occurred (see, People v Webster, 248 AD2d 738, 739). Thompson, J. P., Feuerstein, Schmidt and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 609, 704 N.Y.S.2d 826, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2319, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-norwood-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack