People v. Hakim-Peters
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
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
- People v. SuarezNew York Court of Appeals · 2005
- People v. BattlesNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
- People v. LewieNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
- People v. PrindleNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
- People v. ValenciaNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. AcevedoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. EdwardsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- People v. AcevedoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. LesseyNew York Supreme Court · 2013