People v. Scardino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Scardino

145 A.D.2d 914, 543 N.Y.S.2d 337, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13928

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

DecidedDecember 23, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 145 A.D.2d 914 (People v. Scardino) 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. Scardino, 145 A.D.2d 914, 543 N.Y.S.2d 337, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13928 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant’s convictions for grand larceny in the second degree were supported by legally sufficient evidence (CPL 70.10 [1]). Viewing the evidence, as we must, in the light most favorable to the People, we find that it provided a rational trier of fact with a valid line of reasoning to sustain the convictions (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Further, the trial court properly refrained from charging the moral certainty standard because defendant’s convictions were based on both direct and circumstantial evidence (People v Barnes, [915]*91550 NY2d 375, 379-380). (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Celli, J. — grand larceny, second degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Lawton, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant’s convictions for grand larceny in the second degree were supported by legally sufficient evidence (CPL 70.10 [1]). Viewing the evidence, as we must, in the light most favorable to the People, we find that it provided a rational trier of fact with a valid line of reasoning to sustain the convictions (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Further, the trial court properly refrained from charging the moral certainty standard because defendant’s convictions were based on both direct and circumstantial evidence (People v Barnes, [915]*91550 NY2d 375, 379-380). (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Celli, J. — grand larceny, second degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

145 A.D.2d 914, 543 N.Y.S.2d 337, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13928, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-scardino-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack