People v. Rogers

178 A.D.2d 960, 580 N.Y.S.2d 889, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17795
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Rogers. Read the opinion of the Court — 163 A.D.2d 337

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we conclude that defendant’s conviction of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree (Penal Law § 165.50) is supported by legally sufficient evidence. Moreover, upon our review of the evidence, we find that the trier of fact has given the evidence the weight it should be accorded (see, People v [961]*961Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Hannigan, J. — Criminal Possession Stolen Property, 3rd Degree.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

People v. Rogers, 178 A.D.2d 960, 580 N.Y.S.2d 889, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17795 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

178 A.D.2d 960 (People v. Rogers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Contes
454 N.E.2d 932 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
People v. Bleakley
508 N.E.2d 672 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)