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.

The People of the State of New York, Respondent v. Kenneth Glassman-Blanco

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts Appellate Division, First Department


March 21, 2013

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
v.
KENNETH GLASSMAN-BLANCO, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

People v Glassman-Blanco

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.

Decided on March 21, 2013 Sweeny, J.P., Acosta, Roman, Feinman, Clark, JJ.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Cassandra M. Mullen, J.), rendered January 14, 2010, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to time served, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury's credibility determinations. The evidence established that defendant possessed a dangerous knife with the intent to use it unlawfully against the victim, at least in an effort to place the victim in fear of imminent harm.

Defendant argues that the element of unlawful intent was undermined by his acquittals of attempted murder, assault and attempted assault. Although in performing weight of evidence review, we may consider the jury's verdict on other counts (see People v Rayam, 94 NY2d 557, 563 n [2000]), "[w]here a jury verdict is not repugnant, it is imprudent to speculate concerning the factual determinations that underlay the verdict because what might appear to be an irrational verdict may actually constitute a jury's permissible exercise of mercy or leniency" (People v Horne, 97 NY2d 404, 413 [2002]; see also People v Hemmings, 2 NY3d 1, 5 n [2004]). In any event, the jury could have concluded that the events described by the victim occurred, but that they only supported a weapon possession conviction.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: MARCH 21, 2013

CLERK

20130321

© 1992-2013 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.