From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rogers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 10, 1995
220 A.D.2d 542 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

October 10, 1995

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence was not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05). 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, it is well settled that resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witness (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).

The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). O'Brien, J.P., Joy, Altman and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Rogers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 10, 1995
220 A.D.2d 542 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Rogers

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LEO ROGERS, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 10, 1995

Citations

220 A.D.2d 542 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
632 N.Y.S.2d 207

Citing Cases

People v. Royers

The Court further determined that "[t]he defendant's sentence was not excessive." People v. Rogers, 220…