From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. McKay

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 27, 1986
123 A.D.2d 887 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

October 27, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Our examination of the record reveals the existence of sufficient evidence to sustain the trial court's verdict. Viewing the evidence, as we must, in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, e.g., People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), we find that " `any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime[s] beyond a reasonable doubt'" (People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, quoting from Jackson v Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319). Although the conflicting testimony presented an issue of credibility, the resolution of that issue was within the province of the trier of fact (see, People v Shapiro, 117 A.D.2d 688), and the mere fact that the court, as the trier of fact, might have adopted a competing inference did not preclude it from reaching the verdict it did (see, People v Castillo, 47 N.Y.2d 270, 277-278; People v Dobranski, 89 A.D.2d 250, 252). Mollen, P.J., Lazer, Bracken and Kooper, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. McKay

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 27, 1986
123 A.D.2d 887 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

People v. McKay

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOSEPH McKAY, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 27, 1986

Citations

123 A.D.2d 887 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

People v. Hainson

While the testimony of the prosecution witnesses contained some minor inconsistencies, these discrepancies…