From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 17, 1985
111 A.D.2d 873 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

June 17, 1985

Appeal from the County Court, Suffolk County (Weissman, J.).


Judgment affirmed.

Defendant contends that the evidence of his guilt was insufficient, particularly in view of the unreliability of the prosecution's eyewitnesses. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, as we must, a rational trier of fact could have found, as did the jury at bar, that the People proved every essential element of the crimes ( see, People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757, cert denied ___ US ___, 105 S Ct 327; People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620; People v. Piro, 106 A.D.2d 667). As we have noted, "[t]he resolution of questions relating to the credibility of witnesses is properly a function of the jury and * * * may not be overturned lightly on appeal" ( People v. Rodriguez, 72 A.D.2d 571; see also, People v. Bigelow, 106 A.D.2d 448).

We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Lazer, J.P., Gibbons, O'Connor and Brown, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Gross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 17, 1985
111 A.D.2d 873 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

People v. Gross

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES RUDOLPH GROSS…

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

Date published: Jun 17, 1985

Citations

111 A.D.2d 873 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

People v. Stroud

Judgment affirmed. In reviewing the evidence underlying a criminal conviction, the standard to be applied is…

People v. Gavins

The defendant's own testimony contained numerous inconsistencies. It is well settled that "`[t]he resolution…