People v. Walcott

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Walcott

292 A.D.2d 473, 738 N.Y.S.2d 870, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2505

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

DecidedMarch 11, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 292 A.D.2d 473 (People v. Walcott) 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. Walcott, 292 A.D.2d 473, 738 N.Y.S.2d 870, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2505 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Juviler, J.), rendered February 22, 2000, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a [474]*474weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence supporting his conviction was legally insufficient is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the trier of fact, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94), The jury’s determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). Smith, J.P., Goldstein, McGinity and H. Miller, 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 (Juviler, J.), rendered February 22, 2000, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a [474]*474weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence supporting his conviction was legally insufficient is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the trier of fact, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94), The jury’s determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). Smith, J.P., Goldstein, McGinity and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 473, 738 N.Y.S.2d 870, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2505, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-walcott-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack