People v. Padro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Padro

236 A.D.2d 223, 654 N.Y.S.2d 287, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 906

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 236 A.D.2d 223 (People v. Padro) 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. Padro, 236 A.D.2d 223, 654 N.Y.S.2d 287, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 906 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Alvin Schlesinger, J.), rendered January 6, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of sodomy in the first degree and one count of rape in the first degree and burglary in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 81/s to 25 years on the rape and sodomy convictions, to be served consecutively to a term of 2 to 6 years on the burglary conviction, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Factual issues concerning the identification testimony and forensic evidence were properly placed before the jury, and we find no reason to disturb its verdict (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Rubin, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Alvin Schlesinger, J.), rendered January 6, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of sodomy in the first degree and one count of rape in the first degree and burglary in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 81/s to 25 years on the rape and sodomy convictions, to be served consecutively to a term of 2 to 6 years on the burglary conviction, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Factual issues concerning the identification testimony and forensic evidence were properly placed before the jury, and we find no reason to disturb its verdict (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Rubin, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D.2d 223, 654 N.Y.S.2d 287, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 906, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-padro-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack