People v. Rene

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rene

292 A.D.2d 302, 739 N.Y.S.2d 262, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3273

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

DecidedMarch 28, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 292 A.D.2d 302 (People v. Rene) 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. Rene, 292 A.D.2d 302, 739 N.Y.S.2d 262, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3273 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Beeler, J.), rendered January 12, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of robbery in the first degree and two counts of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 4 to 8 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning identification. The identifying victim had an ample [303]*303opportunity to observe defendant and provided a detailed description.

Defendant’s speedy trial motion was properly denied. Defendant’s appellate arguments on this issue are unpreserved (People v Luperon, 85 NY2d 71, 77-78), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that the January 13, 1998 adjournment was properly excluded as time for the People to prepare for the newly ordered hearing (see, CPL 30.30 [4] [a]; People v Green, 90 AD2d 705, lv denied 58 NY2d 784), and that the remaining period challenged by defendant on appeal was properly excluded as having been requested by the defense (CPL 30.30 [4] [b]). Concur — Williams, P.J., Nardelli, Tom, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Beeler, J.), rendered January 12, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of robbery in the first degree and two counts of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 4 to 8 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning identification. The identifying victim had an ample [303]*303opportunity to observe defendant and provided a detailed description.

Defendant’s speedy trial motion was properly denied. Defendant’s appellate arguments on this issue are unpreserved (People v Luperon, 85 NY2d 71, 77-78), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that the January 13, 1998 adjournment was properly excluded as time for the People to prepare for the newly ordered hearing (see, CPL 30.30 [4] [a]; People v Green, 90 AD2d 705, lv denied 58 NY2d 784), and that the remaining period challenged by defendant on appeal was properly excluded as having been requested by the defense (CPL 30.30 [4] [b]). Concur — Williams, P.J., Nardelli, Tom, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 302, 739 N.Y.S.2d 262, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3273, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rene-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack