From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 7, 1994
209 A.D.2d 452 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

November 7, 1994

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's claim that he has automatic standing to contest the lawfulness of the search of the apartment and the seizure of the narcotics and sawed-off rifle is raised for the first time on appeal and thus is not preserved for appellate review (see, People v. Cofresi, 60 N.Y.2d 728, 730).

"Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, and giving it the benefit of every reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom" (People v. Giuliano, 65 N.Y.2d 766, 768), we find that the circumstantial evidence adduced at the trial was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Chalmars, 176 A.D.2d 239). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15).

The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in closing the courtroom during the undercover officer's testimony (see, People v. Martinez, 82 N.Y.2d 436, 443; People v Reece, 204 A.D.2d 495).

The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Lawrence, J.P., O'Brien, Freidmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Ross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 7, 1994
209 A.D.2d 452 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Ross

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANTHONY ROSS, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 7, 1994

Citations

209 A.D.2d 452 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
619 N.Y.S.2d 580

Citing Cases

People v. Hooks [4th Dept 1999

Defendant contends that he had automatic standing to challenge the search of the premises because of the…

People v. Hooks

Defendant contends that he had automatic standing to challenge the search of the premises because of the…