People v. Urena

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Urena

199 A.D.2d 443, 608 N.Y.S.2d 82

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 199 A.D.2d 443 (People v. Urena) 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. Urena, 199 A.D.2d 443, 608 N.Y.S.2d 82 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland [444]*444County (Nelson, J.), rendered May 5, 1992, convicting him of resisting arrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the evidence was legally sufficient to establish his guilt of resisting arrest based on the underlying charge of harassment. The jury could reasonably have inferred from the defendant’s conduct an intent to harass, annoy or alarm the officer whom the defendant had pushed (see, People v Collins, 178 AD2d 789; People v Hare, 66 Misc 2d 207). Further, even if the defendant was not specifically told that he was under arrest, he could infer from the circumstances that he was under arrest (see, People v Gray, 189 AD2d 922; People v SiMartin, 135 AD2d 591).

We find no merit to the defendant’s contentions with regard to his sentence. Mangano, P. J., Balletta, Lawrence and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland [444]*444County (Nelson, J.), rendered May 5, 1992, convicting him of resisting arrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the evidence was legally sufficient to establish his guilt of resisting arrest based on the underlying charge of harassment. The jury could reasonably have inferred from the defendant’s conduct an intent to harass, annoy or alarm the officer whom the defendant had pushed (see, People v Collins, 178 AD2d 789; People v Hare, 66 Misc 2d 207). Further, even if the defendant was not specifically told that he was under arrest, he could infer from the circumstances that he was under arrest (see, People v Gray, 189 AD2d 922; People v SiMartin, 135 AD2d 591).

We find no merit to the defendant’s contentions with regard to his sentence. Mangano, P. J., Balletta, Lawrence and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 A.D.2d 443, 608 N.Y.S.2d 82, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-urena-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack