People v. Rosa

2019 NY Slip Op 7296
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Rosa. Read the opinion of the Court — 171 N.Y.S.3d 227
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 9, 2019·No. Ind. No. 5302/13·Published

Opinion

People v Rosa (2019 NY Slip Op 07296)
People v Rosa
2019 NY Slip Op 07296
Decided on October 9, 2019
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on October 9, 2019 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P.
BETSY BARROS
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

2015-03356
(Ind. No. 5302/13)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Nathan Rosa, appellant.


Stoll, Glickman & Bellina, LLP, Brooklyn, NY (Andrew B. Stoll of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Keith Dolan of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruth E. Shillingford, J.), rendered April 15, 2015, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15[5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633).

Further, contrary to the defendant's contention, the prosecutor did not violate the trial court's Molineux ruling in eliciting certain testimony from the victim's friend (see People v Molineux, 168 NY 264; People v Gomez, 138 AD3d 1017, 1018; People v Rock, 65 AD3d 558, 559).

AUSTIN, J.P., BARROS, CONNOLLY and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

People v. Rosa, 2019 NY Slip Op 7296 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

2019 NY Slip Op 7296 (People v. Rosa) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Mateo
811 N.E.2d 1053 (New York Court of Appeals, 2004)
People v. Danielson
880 N.E.2d 1 (New York Court of Appeals, 2007)
People v. Romero
859 N.E.2d 902 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Gomez
138 A.D.3d 1017 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
People v. . Molineux
61 N.E. 286 (New York Court of Appeals, 1901)
People v. Bleakley
508 N.E.2d 672 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)
People v. Rock
65 A.D.3d 558 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)