People v. Pusepa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pusepa

135 A.D.3d 559, 22 N.Y.S.3d 846

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

DecidedJanuary 19, 2016

Docket16667 2123/12

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 135 A.D.3d 559 (People v. Pusepa) 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. Pusepa, 135 A.D.3d 559, 22 N.Y.S.3d 846 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy L. Kahn, J.), rendered January 9, 2014, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted murder in the second degree and assault in the first degree, and sentencing her to concurrent terms of 8V2 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations. The evidence, including both defendant’s act and the surrounding circumstances, supports a reasonable inference that defendant acted with homicidal intent when she stabbed the victim in the heart (see generally People v Getch, 50 NY2d 456, 465 [1980]). The evidence also refuted defendant’s justification defense.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Acosta, Andrias and Moskowitz, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy L. Kahn, J.), rendered January 9, 2014, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted murder in the second degree and assault in the first degree, and sentencing her to concurrent terms of 8V2 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations. The evidence, including both defendant’s act and the surrounding circumstances, supports a reasonable inference that defendant acted with homicidal intent when she stabbed the victim in the heart (see generally People v Getch, 50 NY2d 456, 465 [1980]). The evidence also refuted defendant’s justification defense.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Acosta, Andrias and Moskowitz, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 A.D.3d 559, 22 N.Y.S.3d 846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pusepa-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack