People v. Swingle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Swingle

187 A.D.2d 1007, 593 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14037

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

DecidedNovember 18, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 187 A.D.2d 1007 (People v. Swingle) 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. Swingle, 187 A.D.2d 1007, 593 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14037 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from her conviction for attempted criminal possession of marihuana in the first degree, defendant’s primary contention is that the evidence is legally insufficient. Assuming that the proof against defendant was wholly circumstantial, we conclude that it was sufficient to rule out all reasonable hypotheses of innocence and to establish defendant’s guilt to a moral certainty (see, People v Way, 59 NY2d 361, 365; People v Benzinger, 36 NY2d 29, 32; People v Seifert, 152 AD2d 433, 440, lv denied 75 NY2d 924, citing People v Morgan, 66 NY2d 255, 256, on remittitur 116 AD2d 919, cert denied 476 US 1120).

We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Ontario County Court, Wisner, J. — Attempted Criminal Possession Marihuana, 1st Degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Lawton and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from her conviction for attempted criminal possession of marihuana in the first degree, defendant’s primary contention is that the evidence is legally insufficient. Assuming that the proof against defendant was wholly circumstantial, we conclude that it was sufficient to rule out all reasonable hypotheses of innocence and to establish defendant’s guilt to a moral certainty (see, People v Way, 59 NY2d 361, 365; People v Benzinger, 36 NY2d 29, 32; People v Seifert, 152 AD2d 433, 440, lv denied 75 NY2d 924, citing People v Morgan, 66 NY2d 255, 256, on remittitur 116 AD2d 919, cert denied 476 US 1120).

We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Ontario County Court, Wisner, J. — Attempted Criminal Possession Marihuana, 1st Degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Lawton and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 A.D.2d 1007, 593 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14037, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-swingle-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack