People v. Yara

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Yara

12 A.D.3d 626, 786 N.Y.S.2d 544, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14197

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 22, 2004·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Reichbach, J.), rendered November 15, 2002, convicting him of murder in the first degree and arson in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]). In any event, 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 the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Spells, 277 AD2d 476, 479 [2000]). The People’s evidence established that the defendant fatally stabbed Erica Alvarez inside her Brooklyn apartment, and then fatally stabbed her two young children. After the stabbings, the defendant started a fire in the bedroom where the bodies lay. Much of this evidence came via the testimony of a jailhouse informant. Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the informant’s crimi[627]*627nal record and history of drug use did not render his testimony incredible as a matter of law (see People v Pagan, 291 AD2d 509, 510 [2002]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Bonner, 5 AD3d 500 [2004]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Reichbach, J.), rendered November 15, 2002, convicting him of murder in the first degree and arson in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]). In any event, 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 the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Spells, 277 AD2d 476, 479 [2000]). The People’s evidence established that the defendant fatally stabbed Erica Alvarez inside her Brooklyn apartment, and then fatally stabbed her two young children. After the stabbings, the defendant started a fire in the bedroom where the bodies lay. Much of this evidence came via the testimony of a jailhouse informant. Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the informant’s crimi[627]*627nal record and history of drug use did not render his testimony incredible as a matter of law (see People v Pagan, 291 AD2d 509, 510 [2002]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Bonner, 5 AD3d 500 [2004]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur.

People v. Yara, 12 A.D.3d 626, 786 N.Y.S.2d 544, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14197 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

12 A.D.3d 626 (People v. Yara) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related