People v. Taylor

237 A.D.2d 546, 656 N.Y.S.2d 890, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2818
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Taylor. Read the opinion of the Court — 203 A.D.2d 77

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Martin, J.), rendered April 27, 1995, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

[547]*547Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). The jury’s determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]). Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Copertino and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Taylor, 237 A.D.2d 546, 656 N.Y.S.2d 890, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2818 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

237 A.D.2d 546 (People v. Taylor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. . Gaimari
68 N.E. 112 (New York Court of Appeals, 1903)
People v. Garafolo
44 A.D.2d 86 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1974)