People v. Saponaro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Saponaro

250 A.D.2d 785, 672 N.Y.S.2d 257, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5748

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

DecidedMay 18, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 250 A.D.2d 785 (People v. Saponaro) 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. Saponaro, 250 A.D.2d 785, 672 N.Y.S.2d 257, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5748 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.), rendered June 17, 1996, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

[786]*786Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions, including those raised in his pro se supplemental brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Thompson and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.), rendered June 17, 1996, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

[786]*786Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions, including those raised in his pro se supplemental brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Thompson and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D.2d 785, 672 N.Y.S.2d 257, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5748, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-saponaro-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack