People v. Samuel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Samuel

109 A.D.2d 900, 486 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47431

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 109 A.D.2d 900 (People v. Samuel) 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. Samuel, 109 A.D.2d 900, 486 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47431 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Harrington, J.), rendered June 3, 1983, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), burglary in the first degree (three counts), and robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The evidence adduced at trial, which included testimony by three prosecution witnesses on the identification issue, viewed in the light most favorable to the People (People v Kennedy, 47 NY2d 196; People v Benzinger, 36 NY2d 29; People v Herbert, 100 AD2d 883), was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant committed the crimes of which he was convicted.

We have considered defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Harrington, J.), rendered June 3, 1983, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), burglary in the first degree (three counts), and robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The evidence adduced at trial, which included testimony by three prosecution witnesses on the identification issue, viewed in the light most favorable to the People (People v Kennedy, 47 NY2d 196; People v Benzinger, 36 NY2d 29; People v Herbert, 100 AD2d 883), was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant committed the crimes of which he was convicted.

We have considered defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 A.D.2d 900, 486 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47431, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-samuel-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack