People v. Segura

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Segura

18 A.D.3d 379, 795 N.Y.S.2d 445, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5705

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

DecidedMay 26, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.3d 379 (People v. Segura) 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. Segura, 18 A.D.3d 379, 795 N.Y.S.2d 445, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5705 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles J. Tejada, J.), rendered May 28, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury tried, of attempted murder in the second degree (two counts), assault in the first degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including inconsistencies in testimony, were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). We note that defendant’s justification defense was significantly undermined by his own testimony.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Friedman, J.P., Sullivan, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

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

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles J. Tejada, J.), rendered May 28, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury tried, of attempted murder in the second degree (two counts), assault in the first degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including inconsistencies in testimony, were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). We note that defendant’s justification defense was significantly undermined by his own testimony.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Friedman, J.P., Sullivan, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.3d 379, 795 N.Y.S.2d 445, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5705, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-segura-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack