Legal Opinion

People v. Thomas

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

Decided December 22, 2009PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence is not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484 [2008]). 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 suf*1142ficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the…

2Cases cited10 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. CrimminsNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  5. People v. RomeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2006

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. Ya-ko ChiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
  2. People v. GadsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  3. MEMON, HAMID A., PEOPLE vAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
  4. People v. GadsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API