People v. Stewart

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Stewart

11 A.D.3d 568, 782 N.Y.S.2d 799, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12012

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 12, 2004·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered June 14, 2002, convicting him of murder in the second degree, aggravated criminal contempt, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s posttrial motion to dismiss on the ground that the People failed to prove a prima facie case was not sufficiently specific to preserve for appellate review his claim with respect to the issue of identity (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), 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 are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s contention that the trial court should have given a circumstantial evidence charge is not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Kitchens, 268 AD2d 444 [2000]) and, in any event, is without merit. Florio, J.P., H. Miller, Goldstein and Skelos, 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, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered June 14, 2002, convicting him of murder in the second degree, aggravated criminal contempt, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s posttrial motion to dismiss on the ground that the People failed to prove a prima facie case was not sufficiently specific to preserve for appellate review his claim with respect to the issue of identity (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), 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 are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s contention that the trial court should have given a circumstantial evidence charge is not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Kitchens, 268 AD2d 444 [2000]) and, in any event, is without merit. Florio, J.P., H. Miller, Goldstein and Skelos, JJ., concur.

People v. Stewart, 11 A.D.3d 568, 782 N.Y.S.2d 799, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12012 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

11 A.D.3d 568 (People v. Stewart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related