Legal Opinion

People v. Hakim-Peters

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided February 9, 2012PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKavanagh, J.

*1032Further, we find that the evidence introduced at trial was legally insufficient to support a finding that defendant acted with depraved indifference during the altercation with his son, and Supreme Court’s decision granting defendant’s motion to modify the verdict should be affirmed. “ A verdict is legally sufficient when, viewing the facts in a light most favorable to the People, there is a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences from which a rational jury could have found the elements of the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt’ ” (People v Brown, 17 NY3d 863, 865 [2011],…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. People v. SuarezNew York Court of Appeals · 2005
  2. People v. BattlesNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
  3. People v. LewieNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. People v. PrindleNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
  5. People v. ValenciaNew York Court of Appeals · 2010

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. AcevedoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  2. People v. EdwardsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
  3. People v. AcevedoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  4. People v. LesseyNew York Supreme Court · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API