People v. Watkins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Watkins

137 A.D.2d 854, 525 N.Y.S.2d 583, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1912

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 29, 1988·Published

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sacks, J.), rendered January 6, 1982, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, petit larceny (two counts), criminal mischief in the fourth degree, resisting arrest and criminal possession of a hypodermic instrument, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in light most favorable to the prosecu[855] tion (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, 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]).

The defendant’s contention that the trial court’s pretrial Sandoval ruling constituted an abuse of discretion is without merit (see, People v Frumerin, 121 AD2d 736, lv denied 68 NY2d 812). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Rubin and Spatt, 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, Richmond County (Sacks, J.), rendered January 6, 1982, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, petit larceny (two counts), criminal mischief in the fourth degree, resisting arrest and criminal possession of a hypodermic instrument, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in light most favorable to the prosecu[855] tion (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, 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]).

The defendant’s contention that the trial court’s pretrial Sandoval ruling constituted an abuse of discretion is without merit (see, People v Frumerin, 121 AD2d 736, lv denied 68 NY2d 812). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.

People v. Watkins, 137 A.D.2d 854, 525 N.Y.S.2d 583, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1912 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

137 A.D.2d 854 (People v. Watkins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related