From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Quinones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 8, 2003
2 A.D.3d 541 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-00439.

Decided December 8, 2003.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kreindler, J.), rendered January 8, 2002, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, (Mae C. Quinn of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, (Leonard Joblove and Scott J. Splittgerber of counsel), for respondent.

Before: BARRY A. COZIER, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses ( see People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84) . Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record ( see People v. Garafalo, 44 A.D.2d 86). 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).

The defendant's contention that his adjudication as a persistent violent felony offender violated his right to a jury trial is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit ( see People v. Rosen, 96 N.Y.2d 329, 335, cert denied 534 U.S. 899). The case of Brown v. Greiner ( 253 F. Supp.2d 413, superseded 258 F. Supp.2d 68) does not hold to the contrary ( see Matter of DeBellis v. Property Clerk of City of N.Y., 79 N.Y.2d 49, 57).

The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

SANTUCCI, J.P., KRAUSMAN, COZIER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Quinones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 8, 2003
2 A.D.3d 541 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Quinones

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. EDGAR QUINONES, appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 8, 2003

Citations

2 A.D.3d 541 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
767 N.Y.S.2d 921

Citing Cases

People v. Quinones

May 21, 2004. Appeal from the 2d Dept: 2 AD3d 541 (Kings). Application in criminal case for leave to appeal…

People v. Horne

The remarks in question were fair comment on the evidence ( see People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105), fair…