Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. SALAZAR

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Nov 3, 2003
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.
DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the pretrial identification procedures were not unduly suggestive ( see People v. Chipp, 75 N.Y.2d 327, cert denied 498 U.S. 833). In addition, the issue of whether the defendant was deprived of his right to confrontation when a witness invoked the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination regarding affiliation with a gang is unpreserved for appellate review. In any event, the defendant's contention is without merit, as the witness's bias or interest was fully explored through other means ( see People v. Chin, 67 N.Y.2d 22).

The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see CPL 470.15).

SMITH, J.P., McGINITY, H. MILLER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.