People v. Sullivan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sullivan

304 A.D.2d 678, 757 N.Y.S.2d 492

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

DecidedApril 14, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 304 A.D.2d 678 (People v. Sullivan) 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. Sullivan, 304 A.D.2d 678, 757 N.Y.S.2d 492 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Braslow, J.), rendered March 8, 2001, convicting her of burglary in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

[679]*679Viewing 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 beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant entered the complainant’s dwelling with intent to commit a crime therein. 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 sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]; see also People v Delgado, 80 NY2d 780 [1992]). Florio, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Adams, 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 County Court, Suffolk County (Braslow, J.), rendered March 8, 2001, convicting her of burglary in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

[679]*679Viewing 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 beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant entered the complainant’s dwelling with intent to commit a crime therein. 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 sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]; see also People v Delgado, 80 NY2d 780 [1992]). Florio, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Adams, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

304 A.D.2d 678, 757 N.Y.S.2d 492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sullivan-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack