People v. Quevedo

156 A.D.2d 265, 548 N.Y.S.2d 655, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15728
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 19, 1989
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 156 A.D.2d 265 (People v. Quevedo) 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. Quevedo, 156 A.D.2d 265, 548 N.Y.S.2d 655, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15728 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert M. Haft, J.), rendered October 17, 1986, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of the crimes of robbery in the third degree and grand larceny in the third degree and, upon resentence for violation of probation, of attempted burglary in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a predicate felony offender, to concurrent terms of 3 Vi to 7 years’, 2 to 4 years’ and 1 Vi to 4 years’ imprisonment, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

We are not persuaded that minor inconsistencies in the height and weight given in identification testimony of the victim and an eyewitness, on the one hand, and defendant’s appearance, on the other hand, rendered the identification testimony incredible as a matter of law. It is well settled that it is the jury’s function to evaluate the credibility of witnesses (People v Parks, 41 NY2d 36, 47) and here it had a full opportunity to compare defendant’s appearance with testimony of his description at the time of the crime. Defendant’s challenges to the prosecutor’s comments on summation are [266]*266unpreserved as a matter of law (CPL 470.05 [2]) and we find no reason to review them in the interest of justice, although, if we did, we would find them unobjectionable. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Asch, Kassal, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Cates
245 A.D.2d 31 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
In re David V.
226 A.D.2d 319 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
In re Jonitta C.
213 A.D.2d 248 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
People v. Murchison
189 A.D.2d 900 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
People v. Pittman
186 A.D.2d 282 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Rios
180 A.D.2d 696 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Wigfall
161 A.D.2d 413 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Green
161 A.D.2d 359 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Lozado
157 A.D.2d 630 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
156 A.D.2d 265, 548 N.Y.S.2d 655, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15728, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-quevedo-nyappdiv-1989.