People v. Williams

284 A.D.2d 957, 726 N.Y.S.2d 321, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5940
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 8, 2001·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[958]*958Law §§ 110.00,130.35 [3]), and two counts each of sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.65 [3]) and endangering the welfare of a child (Penal Law § 260.10 [1]). We reject his contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. “Great deference is to be accorded to the fact-finder’s resolution of credibility issues based upon its superior vantage point and its opportunity to view witnesses, observe demeanor and hear the testimony” (People v Valencia, 263 AD2d 874, 876, lv denied 94 NY2d 799; see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, King, J.— Rape, 1st Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Pine, Wisner, Kehoe and Burns, JJ.

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

People v. Williams, 284 A.D.2d 957, 726 N.Y.S.2d 321, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5940 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

284 A.D.2d 957 (People v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Collins
43 A.D.3d 1338 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)