People v. Vesprey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Vesprey

123 A.D.2d 726, 507 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60867

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

DecidedOctober 14, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 123 A.D.2d 726 (People v. Vesprey) 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. Vesprey, 123 A.D.2d 726, 507 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60867 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Miller, J.), rendered May 31, 1984, convicting him of robbery in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s conviction arose out of an armed robbery [727]*727which occurred on January 8, 1983, at about 3:00 p.m., in a two-family house in Brooklyn. The victim, a tenant in one of the apartments therein, made a positive identification of the defendant as the armed robber, after the latter was apprehended in the basement of the house 20 minutes after the commission of the crime. Under these circumstances, the evidence of guilt was clearly overwhelming, and the errors alleged by the defendant must be considered harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Lawrence and Kooper, 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 (Miller, J.), rendered May 31, 1984, convicting him of robbery in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s conviction arose out of an armed robbery [727]*727which occurred on January 8, 1983, at about 3:00 p.m., in a two-family house in Brooklyn. The victim, a tenant in one of the apartments therein, made a positive identification of the defendant as the armed robber, after the latter was apprehended in the basement of the house 20 minutes after the commission of the crime. Under these circumstances, the evidence of guilt was clearly overwhelming, and the errors alleged by the defendant must be considered harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 A.D.2d 726, 507 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60867, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-vesprey-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack