People v. Ugarte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ugarte

18 A.D.3d 213, 793 N.Y.S.2d 762, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4753

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

DecidedMay 3, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.3d 213 (People v. Ugarte) 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. Ugarte, 18 A.D.3d 213, 793 N.Y.S.2d 762, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4753 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael R. Ambrecht, J.), rendered March 10, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 5 to 10 years and Ax!% to 9 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including the weight to be given to inconsistencies in testimony, were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). With regard to the conviction for sale in or near school grounds, the evidence established that the distance in question was considerably less than the statutory 1,000 feet. Concur—Tom, J.E, Saxe, Friedman, Marlow and Catterson, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael R. Ambrecht, J.), rendered March 10, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 5 to 10 years and Ax!% to 9 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including the weight to be given to inconsistencies in testimony, were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). With regard to the conviction for sale in or near school grounds, the evidence established that the distance in question was considerably less than the statutory 1,000 feet. Concur—Tom, J.E, Saxe, Friedman, Marlow and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.3d 213, 793 N.Y.S.2d 762, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ugarte-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack