From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 8, 1991
172 A.D.2d 624 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

April 8, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Juviler, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that certain inconsistencies rendered the complainant's testimony incredible. However, 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, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).

Furthermore, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in ruling that the prosecutor could cross-examine the defendant with respect to two of five prior crimes in the event that he elected to testify (see, People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371). Significantly, both convictions which the court declined to preclude involved theft-related offenses, and demonstrated the defendant's willingness to place his own interests ahead of the interests of society (see, People v. Sandoval, supra; People v Branch, 155 A.D.2d 475). Moreover, the prior convictions were not so remote in time as to mandate preclusion (see, People v Salcedo, 133 A.D.2d 129; see also, People v. Damon, 150 A.D.2d 479).

We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, and find that they are either unpreserved for appellate review, or are without merit. Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Balletta and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 8, 1991
172 A.D.2d 624 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Jones

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROBERT JONES, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 8, 1991

Citations

172 A.D.2d 624 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)