People v. Presti

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Presti

139 A.D.2d 537, 526 N.Y.S.2d 794, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3761

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

DecidedApril 4, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 139 A.D.2d 537 (People v. Presti) 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. Presti, 139 A.D.2d 537, 526 N.Y.S.2d 794, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3761 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Oueens County (Appelman, J.), rendered June 19, 1987, convicting him of attempted arson in the second degree, reckless endangerment in the first degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed and the case is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), it established the defendant’s motive and opportunity to commit the crimes and excluded any reasonable hypothesis of innocence (see, People v Feuerstein, 74 AD2d 853; People v Landers, 107 AD2d 1022). [538]*538Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Weinstein and Balletta, 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, Oueens County (Appelman, J.), rendered June 19, 1987, convicting him of attempted arson in the second degree, reckless endangerment in the first degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed and the case is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), it established the defendant’s motive and opportunity to commit the crimes and excluded any reasonable hypothesis of innocence (see, People v Feuerstein, 74 AD2d 853; People v Landers, 107 AD2d 1022). [538]*538Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Weinstein and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 A.D.2d 537, 526 N.Y.S.2d 794, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3761, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-presti-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack