People v. Vega

860 N.E.2d 704, 7 N.Y.3d 890, 827 N.Y.S.2d 87, 2006 NY Slip Op 8642, 2006 N.Y. LEXIS 3569
New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 21, 2006·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Based on the testimony of detectives who observed defendant engage in narcotics transactions, he was convicted of two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. The Appellate Division rejected defendant’s argument that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, concluding that there was “no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility, including its resolution of inconsistencies in the detectives’ testimony (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903])” (25 AD3d 382, 382 [1st Dept 2006]). The Appellate Division’s citation to Gaimari does not indicate that the Court failed to apply the proper legal standard for analyzing defendant’s challenge to the weight of the evidence supporting the conviction (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 645-646 [decided today]).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read, Smith and Pigott concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

People v. Vega, 860 N.E.2d 704, 7 N.Y.3d 890, 827 N.Y.S.2d 87, 2006 NY Slip Op 8642, 2006 N.Y. LEXIS 3569 (N.Y. 2006).

860 N.E.2d 704 (People v. Vega) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Olson
878 N.E.2d 999 (New York Court of Appeals, 2007)