Legal Opinion

People v. Noll

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

Decided March 29, 2011PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant contends that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt by legally sufficient evidence because he was not responsible by reason of mental disease or defect (see Penal Law § 40.15). This contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Ginsberg, 36 AD3d 627, 628 [2007]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Trojan, 73 AD3d 818 [2010]; People v Ginsberg,…

2Cases cited9 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

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. CapelaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
  2. People v. MacFarlaneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
  3. People v. CapelaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
  4. People v. WatersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API