People v. Williams

44 A.D.3d 1080, 844 N.Y.S.2d 389
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Williams. Read the opinion of the Court — 14 A.D.3d 519

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), rendered October 16, 2003, convicting him of promoting prison contraband in the first degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant’s guilt of promoting prison contraband in the first degree (see Penal Law § 205.25 [2]). Furthermore, resolution of issues of credibility is primarily a matter to be determined by the trier of fact, who saw and heard the witnesses, and his or her determination should be afforded great deference on appeal (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 644-645 [2006]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]). Upon the exercise of our factual review power (see CPL 470.15 [5]), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d at 633). Miller, J.P., Ritter, Covello and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Williams, 44 A.D.3d 1080, 844 N.Y.S.2d 389 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

44 A.D.3d 1080 (People v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Mateo
811 N.E.2d 1053 (New York Court of Appeals, 2004)
People v. Romero
859 N.E.2d 902 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Contes
454 N.E.2d 932 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)