People v. Wingate
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant’s contention in his supplemental pro se>hriefi that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Finger, 95 NY2d 894; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 20-21). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. BaldiNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- People v. GrayNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- People v. FingerNew York Court of Appeals · 2000
- People v. LongtinNew York Court of Appeals · 1998
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. WeeksAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- People v. BookerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- People v. EdwardsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- People v. PalmerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- People v. KadryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.