People v. Sweet

167 A.D.2d 937, 563 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14515
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Sweet. Read the opinion of the Court — 155 A.D.2d 61

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a conviction for robbery in the first and second degrees and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. Although there was conflicting evidence, the testimony of the victim was not incredible as a matter of law, and our independent review of the record discloses no reason to disturb the jury’s resolution of witness credibility (see, People v Christian, 139 AD2d 896, lv denied 71 NY2d 1024; see also, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495).

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting rebuttal evidence. The victim’s testimony was offered to disprove a factual version of the event that was presented by two defense witnesses and was not elicited solely to impeach the credibility of those witnesses (see, People v Alvino, 71 NY2d 233, 248). The issue concerning improper bolstering was not preserved for our review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to exercise our discretionary power of review (see, CPL 470.15 [6]). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, McCarthy, J.—robbery, first degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Denman, Green and Balio, JJ.

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

People v. Sweet, 167 A.D.2d 937, 563 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14515 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

167 A.D.2d 937 (People v. Sweet) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Bleakley
508 N.E.2d 672 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)
People v. Alvino
519 N.E.2d 808 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)
People v. Christian
139 A.D.2d 896 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)