Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Cary

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


March 31, 2009

THE PEOPLE, ETC., RESPONDENT,
v.
RICHARD CARY, APPELLANT. (IND. NOS. 2089-06, 716-07)

Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered April 16, 2007, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree and resisting arrest under Indictment No. 2089-06, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, and (2) a judgment of the same court rendered July 25, 2007, convicting him of assault in the second degree under Indictment No. 716-07, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., STEVEN W. FISHER, FRED T. SANTUCCI & RUTH C. BALKIN, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at the trial of Indictment No. 2089-06 in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15[5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410, cert denied 542 US 946; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt on Indictment No. 2089-06 was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633).

The sentences imposed were not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

SKELOS, J.P., FISHER, SANTUCCI and BALKIN, JJ., concur.

20090331

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.