People v. Rivers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rivers

139 A.D.2d 915, 527 N.Y.S.2d 991, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4088

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

DecidedApril 8, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 139 A.D.2d 915 (People v. Rivers) 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. Rivers, 139 A.D.2d 915, 527 N.Y.S.2d 991, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4088 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People and giving them the benefit of every reasonable inference we find that the evidence was legally sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions for criminal mischief in the third degree (Penal Law § 145.05) and attempted grand larceny in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 155.30 [1]). Further, defendant’s claims of prosecutorial misconduct are not properly preserved for our review (CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to exercise our discretion to review them in the interests of justice (CPL 470.15 [6]). (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga County Court, Burke, J. — criminal mischief, third degree, and attempted grand larceny, third degree.) Present— Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People and giving them the benefit of every reasonable inference we find that the evidence was legally sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions for criminal mischief in the third degree (Penal Law § 145.05) and attempted grand larceny in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 155.30 [1]). Further, defendant’s claims of prosecutorial misconduct are not properly preserved for our review (CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to exercise our discretion to review them in the interests of justice (CPL 470.15 [6]). (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga County Court, Burke, J. — criminal mischief, third degree, and attempted grand larceny, third degree.) Present— Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 A.D.2d 915, 527 N.Y.S.2d 991, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4088, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rivers-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack