People v. Palmer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Palmer

184 A.D.2d 534

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 1, 1992·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.), rendered November 27, 1989, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the People (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s claim that the fourth and fifth counts of the indictment are duplicitous is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit (see, CPL 200.30 [1]).

We also find that the hearing court properly refused the defendant’s request to call one of the complaining witnesses to testify at the Wade hearing (see, People v Chipp, 75 NY2d 327, cert denied 498 US 833). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Pizzuto, 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 (Egitto, J.), rendered November 27, 1989, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the People (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s claim that the fourth and fifth counts of the indictment are duplicitous is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit (see, CPL 200.30 [1]).

We also find that the hearing court properly refused the defendant’s request to call one of the complaining witnesses to testify at the Wade hearing (see, People v Chipp, 75 NY2d 327, cert denied 498 US 833). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

People v. Palmer, 184 A.D.2d 534 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

184 A.D.2d 534 (People v. Palmer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related