People v. Whitfield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Whitfield

158 A.D.2d 922, 551 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1422

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

DecidedFebruary 2, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 158 A.D.2d 922 (People v. Whitfield) 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. Whitfield, 158 A.D.2d 922, 551 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1422 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

[923]*923Evidence that defendant made contradictory statements to police was insufficient to prove to a moral certainty that defendant knew the property was stolen (see, People v Rolland, 128 AD2d 650). The People failed to request an instruction on the inference arising from the recent and exclusive possession of the fruits of a crime and thus, the jury could not consider the inference in arriving at its verdict (People v Felder, 132 AD2d 705; People v Hunt, 112 AD2d 781). In the absence of the inference, the proof was insufficient to establish that defendant knew the photography equipment was stolen, and the indictment must be dismissed (see, People v Hunt, supra; People v Edwards, 104 AD2d 448, 449). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Egan, J. — criminal possession of stolen property, second degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

[923]*923Evidence that defendant made contradictory statements to police was insufficient to prove to a moral certainty that defendant knew the property was stolen (see, People v Rolland, 128 AD2d 650). The People failed to request an instruction on the inference arising from the recent and exclusive possession of the fruits of a crime and thus, the jury could not consider the inference in arriving at its verdict (People v Felder, 132 AD2d 705; People v Hunt, 112 AD2d 781). In the absence of the inference, the proof was insufficient to establish that defendant knew the photography equipment was stolen, and the indictment must be dismissed (see, People v Hunt, supra; People v Edwards, 104 AD2d 448, 449). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Egan, J. — criminal possession of stolen property, second degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 A.D.2d 922, 551 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1422, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-whitfield-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack