People v. Pfeiffer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pfeiffer

259 A.D.2d 565, 684 N.Y.S.2d 901, 686 N.Y.S.2d 455, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2175

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 8, 1999·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), rendered October 1, 1996, convicting him of assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Santucci, J. P., Joy, Friedmann 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, Queens County (Thomas, J.), rendered October 1, 1996, convicting him of assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Santucci, J. P., Joy, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

People v. Pfeiffer, 259 A.D.2d 565, 684 N.Y.S.2d 901, 686 N.Y.S.2d 455, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2175 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

259 A.D.2d 565 (People v. Pfeiffer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related