People v. Soto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Soto

293 A.D.2d 501, 739 N.Y.S.2d 631, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3320

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

DecidedApril 1, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 293 A.D.2d 501 (People v. Soto) 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. Soto, 293 A.D.2d 501, 739 N.Y.S.2d 631, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3320 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered July 10, 2000, convicting her of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish her guilt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Bynum, 70 NY2d 858; People v Fryar, 276 AD2d 641). 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 [502]*502are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]). Santucci, J.P., Altman, Florio 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 (Tomei, J.), rendered July 10, 2000, convicting her of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish her guilt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Bynum, 70 NY2d 858; People v Fryar, 276 AD2d 641). 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 [502]*502are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]). Santucci, J.P., Altman, Florio and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

293 A.D.2d 501, 739 N.Y.S.2d 631, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-soto-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack