People v. Pineras

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pineras

113 A.D.3d 489, 978 N.Y.2d 681

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 16, 2014·Published

Opinion

The verdict was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations. There was nonaccomplice testimony and documentary evidence that satisfied the standards for corroboration of accomplice testimony (see People v Reome, 15 [490]*490NY3d 188, 192-193 [2010]). Furthermore, defendant’s behavior after the theft evinced a consciousness of guilt, and provided further assurances of the reliability of the accomplice testimony. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, DeGrasse, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

The verdict was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations. There was nonaccomplice testimony and documentary evidence that satisfied the standards for corroboration of accomplice testimony (see People v Reome, 15 [490]*490NY3d 188, 192-193 [2010]). Furthermore, defendant’s behavior after the theft evinced a consciousness of guilt, and provided further assurances of the reliability of the accomplice testimony. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, DeGrasse, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

People v. Pineras, 113 A.D.3d 489, 978 N.Y.2d 681 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

113 A.D.3d 489 (People v. Pineras) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related