People v. Williams

266 A.D.2d 413, 697 N.Y.S.2d 531, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11476
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Williams. Read the opinion of the Court — 235 A.D.2d 267

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Ort, J.), rendered March 18, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The showup identification procedure was not unduly suggestive (see, People v Duuvon, 77 NY2d 541).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the evidence was legally sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim suffered a physical injury. As such, the defendant was properly convicted of robbery in the second degree, and it is not necessary to reduce the conviction to robbery in the third degree (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620; People v Henderson, 92 NY2d 677).

The defendant was properly sentenced as a persistent violent felony offender (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662), and his sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Bracken, J. P., Joy, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Williams, 266 A.D.2d 413, 697 N.Y.S.2d 531, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11476 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

266 A.D.2d 413 (People v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Henderson
708 N.E.2d 165 (New York Court of Appeals, 1999)
People v. Contes
454 N.E.2d 932 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
People v. Lopez
525 N.E.2d 5 (New York Court of Appeals, 1988)
People v. Duuvon
571 N.E.2d 654 (New York Court of Appeals, 1991)
People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)