Legal Opinion
People v. Tucker
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 8, 2014PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*643The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]) his contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that he damaged property with a value in excess of $250 (see Penal Law § 145.05 [2]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction of criminal mischief in the third degree beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Towsley, 85 AD3d 1549, 1550 [2011]; People v Katovich, 238 AD2d 751, 752…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. RomeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
- People v. TowsleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. KatovichAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- People v. AgronAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- People v. LemmoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- People v. TsintzelisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- People v. KhudanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020