People v. Raffaelle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Raffaelle

114 A.D.2d 384, 493 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53063

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

DecidedOctober 7, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 114 A.D.2d 384 (People v. Raffaelle) 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. Raffaelle, 114 A.D.2d 384, 493 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53063 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered May 24, 1982, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

[385]*385Despite defendant’s contention to the contrary, we conclude that the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to permit a rational trier of fact to find that he was guilty of attempted robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [4]; People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621).

We have considered defendant’s other claims of error and find them to be lacking in merit or unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law. Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered May 24, 1982, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

[385]*385Despite defendant’s contention to the contrary, we conclude that the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to permit a rational trier of fact to find that he was guilty of attempted robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [4]; People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621).

We have considered defendant’s other claims of error and find them to be lacking in merit or unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law. Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.2d 384, 493 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53063, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-raffaelle-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack