People v. Valverde

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Valverde

216 A.D.2d 339, 627 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5981

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

DecidedJune 5, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 216 A.D.2d 339 (People v. Valverde) 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. Valverde, 216 A.D.2d 339, 627 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5981 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered March 15,1993, as amended April 6, 1993, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), attempted robbery in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim of error as to the admission of certain hearsay testimony by the codefendants’ uncle is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Dubois, 137 AD2d 706). In any event, any error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Pizzuto, J. P., Hart, Friedmann and Florio, 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 Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered March 15,1993, as amended April 6, 1993, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), attempted robbery in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim of error as to the admission of certain hearsay testimony by the codefendants’ uncle is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Dubois, 137 AD2d 706). In any event, any error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Pizzuto, J. P., Hart, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 339, 627 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5981, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-valverde-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack