People v. Prashad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Prashad

225 A.D.2d 637, 639 N.Y.2d 741, 639 N.Y.S.2d 741, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2138

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

DecidedMarch 11, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 225 A.D.2d 637 (People v. Prashad) 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. Prashad, 225 A.D.2d 637, 639 N.Y.2d 741, 639 N.Y.S.2d 741, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2138 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

[638]*638The defendant’s contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support his convictions of sexual abuse in the first degree and endangering the welfare of a child is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 250). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Harvey, 175 AD2d 138). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Ritgers, 158 AD2d 628). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

[638]*638The defendant’s contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support his convictions of sexual abuse in the first degree and endangering the welfare of a child is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 250). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Harvey, 175 AD2d 138). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Ritgers, 158 AD2d 628). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 A.D.2d 637, 639 N.Y.2d 741, 639 N.Y.S.2d 741, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-prashad-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack