Legal Opinion

People v. Walters

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

Decided January 12, 2010PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction of robbery in the second degree is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 492 [2008]; People v Laviscount, 57 AD3d 1007, 1008 [2008]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v *769Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see Penal Law § 160.00 [2]; § 160.10 [2]; People v Mattis, 46 AD3d 929, 931-932 [2007]).…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. People v. BleakleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. People v. DanielsonNew York Court of Appeals · 2007
  4. People v. RomeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
  5. People v. MateoNew York Court of Appeals · 2004

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. SamarooAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API