People v. Sidiropulo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sidiropulo

282 A.D.2d 626, 722 N.Y.S.2d 913, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3742

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

DecidedApril 16, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 282 A.D.2d 626 (People v. Sidiropulo) 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. Sidiropulo, 282 A.D.2d 626, 722 N.Y.S.2d 913, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3742 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Leventhal, J.), rendered March 16, 1999, convicting him of assault in the second degree and criminal contempt in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). 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 are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), without merit, or relate to errors that are harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Ritter, J. P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Feuerstein, 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 (Leventhal, J.), rendered March 16, 1999, convicting him of assault in the second degree and criminal contempt in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). 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 are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), without merit, or relate to errors that are harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Ritter, J. P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D.2d 626, 722 N.Y.S.2d 913, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sidiropulo-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack