People v. Ray

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ray

114 A.D.3d 624, 980 N.Y.S.2d 770

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 114 A.D.3d 624 (People v. Ray) 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. Ray, 114 A.D.3d 624, 980 N.Y.S.2d 770 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered October 5, 2011, as amended October 15, 2011, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree and bail jumping in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to consecutive terms of two to four years, unanimously affirmed.

We reject defendant’s claim that the verdict convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property was 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. There was ample evidence that defendant knowingly participated in a scheme to use stolen funds from a fraudulent account to purchase and cash money orders, and that he knowingly possessed stolen property valued in excess of $1,000.

Defendant did not preserve his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his bail jumping conviction, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that the evidence established the elements of the crime (see Penal Law § 215.56). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P, Acosta, Renwick, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered October 5, 2011, as amended October 15, 2011, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree and bail jumping in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to consecutive terms of two to four years, unanimously affirmed.

We reject defendant’s claim that the verdict convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property was 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. There was ample evidence that defendant knowingly participated in a scheme to use stolen funds from a fraudulent account to purchase and cash money orders, and that he knowingly possessed stolen property valued in excess of $1,000.

Defendant did not preserve his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his bail jumping conviction, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that the evidence established the elements of the crime (see Penal Law § 215.56). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P, Acosta, Renwick, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.3d 624, 980 N.Y.S.2d 770, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ray-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack