People v. Price

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Price

157 A.D.2d 752, 551 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 492

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

DecidedJanuary 16, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 157 A.D.2d 752 (People v. Price) 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. Price, 157 A.D.2d 752, 551 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 492 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Moskowitz, J.), rendered March 14, 1986, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

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, 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]).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Brown, Eiber and Rosenblatt, 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 (Moskowitz, J.), rendered March 14, 1986, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

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, 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]).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Brown, Eiber and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 A.D.2d 752, 551 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-price-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack