Legal Opinion
People v. Laviscount
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 30, 2008PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*1008The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction of robbery in the third degree is unpreserved for appellate review (see GPL 470.05 [2]; People v Andolina, 23 AD3d 573 [2005]; People v Ross, 180 AD2d 698 [1992]). 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 beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant forcibly stole property from the complainant (see Penal Law § 160.05; People v Cusimano, 48 AD3d 475 [2008]; People v…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. RomeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
- People v. RossAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- People v. AdamesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. AndolinaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- People v. PetersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- People v. HeathAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- People v. WaltersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010