People v. Rodriquez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rodriquez

186 A.D.2d 520

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

DecidedOctober 29, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 520 (People v. Rodriquez) 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. Rodriquez, 186 A.D.2d 520 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence J. Tonetti, J.), rendered January 24, 1990, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 8 to 16 years, unanimously affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People (People v Malizia, 62 NY2d 755, cert denied 469 US 932), the evidence was sufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict. The complainant had several good opportunities to view defendant and his cohorts, defendant and his cohorts were arrested within minutes of the robbery, knives and guns were found on and around defendant and his cohorts, and finally, the complainant’s possessions were found on defendant and his cohorts. While defendant challenges the complainant’s credibility, any possible discrepancies in his testimony were for the jury to resolve (see, People v Avery, 161 AD2d 497).

We have considered defendant’s other claims and find them to be without merit. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Ross, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence J. Tonetti, J.), rendered January 24, 1990, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 8 to 16 years, unanimously affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People (People v Malizia, 62 NY2d 755, cert denied 469 US 932), the evidence was sufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict. The complainant had several good opportunities to view defendant and his cohorts, defendant and his cohorts were arrested within minutes of the robbery, knives and guns were found on and around defendant and his cohorts, and finally, the complainant’s possessions were found on defendant and his cohorts. While defendant challenges the complainant’s credibility, any possible discrepancies in his testimony were for the jury to resolve (see, People v Avery, 161 AD2d 497).

We have considered defendant’s other claims and find them to be without merit. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Ross, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 520, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rodriquez-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack