People v. Riccobono

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Riccobono

282 A.D.2d 552, 722 N.Y.S.2d 752, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3520

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

DecidedApril 9, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 282 A.D.2d 552 (People v. Riccobono) 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. Riccobono, 282 A.D.2d 552, 722 N.Y.S.2d 752, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3520 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered January 30, 1997, convicting him of driving while ability impaired, resisting arrest, and making an unsafe turn, under Indictment No. 2222/96, upon a jury verdict, and (2) a judgment of the same court, also rendered January 30, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, under Indictment No. 1116/96, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced under Indictment No. 2222/96 in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt as to the crime of resisting arrest beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Galvin, 253 AD2d 437; People v Urena, 199 AD2d 443). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the [553]*553verdict of guilt as to the crime of resisting arrest was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The jury charge concerning the crime of resisting arrest was proper (see, People v Ladd, 89 NY2d 893, 895).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Ritter, J. P., Krausman, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered January 30, 1997, convicting him of driving while ability impaired, resisting arrest, and making an unsafe turn, under Indictment No. 2222/96, upon a jury verdict, and (2) a judgment of the same court, also rendered January 30, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, under Indictment No. 1116/96, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced under Indictment No. 2222/96 in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt as to the crime of resisting arrest beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Galvin, 253 AD2d 437; People v Urena, 199 AD2d 443). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the [553]*553verdict of guilt as to the crime of resisting arrest was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The jury charge concerning the crime of resisting arrest was proper (see, People v Ladd, 89 NY2d 893, 895).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Ritter, J. P., Krausman, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D.2d 552, 722 N.Y.S.2d 752, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3520, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-riccobono-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack