Legal Opinion

People v. Burwell

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

Decided December 2, 2008PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*556The defendant’s challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19-20 [1995]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Smith, 16 AD3d 602 [2005]).

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…

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. RomeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
  5. People v. GrayNew York Court of Appeals · 1995

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. NailsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
  2. People v. NailsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API