Legal Opinion

People v. Konikov

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

Decided September 30, 2002PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant contends that his conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree should be reversed because the evidence was legally insufficient to prove the operability of the electronic dart gun recovered at the time of his arrest. However, since the defendant failed to move for a trial order of dismissal on this ground, his claim is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Do-bey, 285 AD2d 655; People v D’Amico, 261 AD2d 635; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. People v. GrayNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. People v. UdzinskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  4. People v. CavinesNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  5. People v. LugoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. BenjaminAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API