People v. Samiec

181 A.D.2d 983, 586 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4573
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 13, 1992·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: There is no merit to defendant’s contentions that his conviction for third degree criminal mischief is against the weight of the evidence and repugnant to his acquittal of fourth degree criminal mischief. The testimony of the three passengers in the car was consistent concerning defendant’s conduct in driving his vehicle into the Blazer. The testimonial inconsistencies cited by defendant are insignificant. Further, there is no logical inconsistency or repugnancy in the verdict finding that defendant intended to damage the Blazer but not the Monarch.

With respect to defendant’s final contention, we conclude that there is sufficient corroboration of the accomplice testimony to support defendant’s conviction of second degree criminal mischief. Evidence of defendant’s incriminating admissions to a nonaccomplice and proof that his sneaker print was consistent with that found on the vehicle tended to connect defendant with the commission of the crime (see, CPL 60.22 [1]; People v Hudson, 51 NY2d 233, 238). (Appeal from Judgment of Genesee County Court, Morton, J. — Criminal Mischief, 2nd Degree.) Present — Denman, P. J., Boomer, Green, Balio and Doerr, JJ.

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

People v. Samiec, 181 A.D.2d 983, 586 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4573 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

181 A.D.2d 983 (People v. Samiec) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

REED, EDWARD, PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
People v. Reed
115 A.D.3d 1334 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)