People v. Willis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Willis

303 A.D.2d 936, 756 N.Y.S.2d 698, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2835

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

DecidedMarch 21, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 303 A.D.2d 936 (People v. Willis) 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. Willis, 303 A.D.2d 936, 756 N.Y.S.2d 698, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2835 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of Erie County Court (DiTullio, J.), entered January 10, 2001, convicting defendant after a jury trial of, inter alia, burglary in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of burglary in the first degree (Penal Law § 140.30 [4]), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (§ 265.03 [2]), criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (§ 265.02 [1]) and menacing in the second degree (§ 120.14 [1]). Contrary to defendant’s contentions, the conviction is supported by legally sufficient evidence and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). County Court properly allowed the complaining witness to testify that he had observed defendant with the painted handgun at issue two months prior to the incident. The testimony was properly admitted to connect the handgun found in the basement to defendant, not to establish that defendant has a criminal propensity (see generally People v Brown, 266 AD2d 863 [1999], lv denied 94 NY2d 860 [1999]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his further contention that the court erred in allowing the prosecutor to impeach a prosecution witness (see generally People v Chavez, 275 AD2d 888, 888-889 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 962 [2000]). Finally, we reject the further contentions of defendant that he was deprived of a fair trial by alleged prosecutorial misconduct (see generally People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396, 401 [1981]) and that the sentence is unduly harsh or severe. Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Scudder, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.

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

—Appeal from a judgment of Erie County Court (DiTullio, J.), entered January 10, 2001, convicting defendant after a jury trial of, inter alia, burglary in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of burglary in the first degree (Penal Law § 140.30 [4]), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (§ 265.03 [2]), criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (§ 265.02 [1]) and menacing in the second degree (§ 120.14 [1]). Contrary to defendant’s contentions, the conviction is supported by legally sufficient evidence and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). County Court properly allowed the complaining witness to testify that he had observed defendant with the painted handgun at issue two months prior to the incident. The testimony was properly admitted to connect the handgun found in the basement to defendant, not to establish that defendant has a criminal propensity (see generally People v Brown, 266 AD2d 863 [1999], lv denied 94 NY2d 860 [1999]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his further contention that the court erred in allowing the prosecutor to impeach a prosecution witness (see generally People v Chavez, 275 AD2d 888, 888-889 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 962 [2000]). Finally, we reject the further contentions of defendant that he was deprived of a fair trial by alleged prosecutorial misconduct (see generally People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396, 401 [1981]) and that the sentence is unduly harsh or severe. Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Scudder, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 936, 756 N.Y.S.2d 698, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2835, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-willis-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack