People v. Scott

289 A.D.2d 974, 735 N.Y.S.2d 442, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12556
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Scott. Read the opinion of the Court — 269 A.D.2d 96

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a bench trial of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree (Penal Law § 165.50) and unauthorized use of a vehicle in the second degree (Penal Law § 165.06). Contrary to defendant’s contention, the conviction is supported by legally sufficient evidence. There is a “valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences [that] could lead a [975]*975rational person to the conclusion reached by the fact finder on the basis of the evidence at trial, viewed in the light most favorable to the People” (People v Williams, 84 NY2d 925, 926). Additionally, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence. The credibility determinations of County Court are entitled to great deference (see, People v Marshall, 269 AD2d 818), and there is no basis to conclude that the court failed to give the evidence the weight that it should be accorded (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Erie County Court, McCarthy, J. — Criminal Possession Stolen Property, 3rd Degree.) Present — Wisner, J. P., Hurlbutt, Kehoe and Burns, JJ.

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

People v. Scott, 289 A.D.2d 974, 735 N.Y.S.2d 442, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12556 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

289 A.D.2d 974 (People v. Scott) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Williams
644 N.E.2d 1367 (New York Court of Appeals, 1994)
People v. Bleakley
508 N.E.2d 672 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)
People v. Marshall
269 A.D.2d 818 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)