People v. Youmans

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Youmans

267 A.D.2d 263, 699 N.Y.S.2d 304, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12499

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 6, 1999·Published

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunlop, J.), rendered November 18, 1996, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, upon á jury verdict, 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), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable' doubt. 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]).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court’s charge, when read as a whole, was proper (see, People v Jordan, 187 AD2d 731; People v Wise, 135 AD2d 593).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Joy, Krausman and Luciano, 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, Queens County (Dunlop, J.), rendered November 18, 1996, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, upon á jury verdict, 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), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable' doubt. 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]).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court’s charge, when read as a whole, was proper (see, People v Jordan, 187 AD2d 731; People v Wise, 135 AD2d 593).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Joy, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

People v. Youmans, 267 A.D.2d 263, 699 N.Y.S.2d 304, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12499 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

267 A.D.2d 263 (People v. Youmans) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related