People v. Thomas
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
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
- People v. BleakleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. DanielsonNew York Court of Appeals · 2007
- People v. CrimminsNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. RomeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. Ya-ko ChiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- People v. GadsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- MEMON, HAMID A., PEOPLE vAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- People v. GadsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013