From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Buford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 2, 1998
248 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

March 2, 1998

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (DeRiggi, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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 of burglary in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt. There was sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude that the garage, which was attached to the complainant's residence and which the defendant entered and took gardening tools from, was a dwelling within the meaning of Penal Law § 140.25 (2) (see, Penal Law § 140.00, [3]; People v. Santana, 143 A.D.2d 207; People v. Green, 141 A.D.2d 760; People v. Stevenson, 116 A.D.2d 756).

The defendant's contention that the jury charge was improper is unpreserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05), and, in any event, without merit.

Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Buford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 2, 1998
248 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Buford

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WALTER BUFORD…

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

Date published: Mar 2, 1998

Citations

248 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
669 N.Y.S.2d 824

Citing Cases

People v. Rivera

760, 761, lv denied 73 N.Y.2d 786). In any event, we find, to the contrary, that the attached, screened-in…

People v. Carmel

Here, it is undisputed that, at the time of the crime, the porch that defendant entered was locked against…