People v. Tirado

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tirado

158 A.D.2d 564, 551 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1785

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

DecidedFebruary 13, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 158 A.D.2d 564 (People v. Tirado) 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. Tirado, 158 A.D.2d 564, 551 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1785 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find it 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 (CPL 470.15 [5]). While the trial court should not have departed from the statutory language in delivering a "no inference” charge (see, People v McLucas, 15 NY2d 167, 171; People v Morris, 129 AD2d 591), the charge delivered in this case was "not so extensive as to draw the jury’s attention to the issue” (People v Baker, 153 AD2d 865; see also, People v Brown, 150 AD2d 472, 473; People v Davidson, 150 AD2d 717).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit (see also, People v White, 158 AD2d 565 [decided herewith]). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Brown and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

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

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find it 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 (CPL 470.15 [5]). While the trial court should not have departed from the statutory language in delivering a "no inference” charge (see, People v McLucas, 15 NY2d 167, 171; People v Morris, 129 AD2d 591), the charge delivered in this case was "not so extensive as to draw the jury’s attention to the issue” (People v Baker, 153 AD2d 865; see also, People v Brown, 150 AD2d 472, 473; People v Davidson, 150 AD2d 717).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit (see also, People v White, 158 AD2d 565 [decided herewith]). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Brown and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 A.D.2d 564, 551 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1785, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tirado-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack