People v. Rollerson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rollerson

50 A.D.3d 1558, 855 N.Y.S.2d 402

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

DecidedApril 25, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.3d 1558 (People v. Rollerson) 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. Rollerson, 50 A.D.3d 1558, 855 N.Y.S.2d 402 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Amy J. Fricano, J.), rendered October 31, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of assault in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [4]). By failing to renew his motion for a trial order of dismissal after presenting evidence, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction (see People v Hines, 97 NY2d 56, 61 [2001], rearg denied 97 NY2d 678 [2001]; People v Snowden, 45 AD3d 1409 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 1039 [2008]). Defendant also failed to preserve for our review his contention that the testimony of two police officers improperly bolstered the victim’s identification testimony (see CPL 470.05 [1559]*1559[2]; People v Carter, 40 AD3d 1211, 1212 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 864 [2007]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present—Centra, J.P., Lunn, Peradotto, Green and Pine, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Amy J. Fricano, J.), rendered October 31, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of assault in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [4]). By failing to renew his motion for a trial order of dismissal after presenting evidence, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction (see People v Hines, 97 NY2d 56, 61 [2001], rearg denied 97 NY2d 678 [2001]; People v Snowden, 45 AD3d 1409 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 1039 [2008]). Defendant also failed to preserve for our review his contention that the testimony of two police officers improperly bolstered the victim’s identification testimony (see CPL 470.05 [1559]*1559[2]; People v Carter, 40 AD3d 1211, 1212 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 864 [2007]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present—Centra, J.P., Lunn, Peradotto, Green and Pine, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.3d 1558, 855 N.Y.S.2d 402, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rollerson-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack