AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. WILLIAM DAVIS, appellant.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

At an independent source hearing, the People established by clear and convincing evidence that the in-court identification of the defendant was based upon the witness's independent observation of the defendant (see, People v. Hyatt, 162 A.D.2d 713, 714; see also, People v. Thomas, 51 N.Y.2d 466, 474-475).

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 the defendant's 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).

The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, H. MILLER and SMITH, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. DAVIS
(May 29, 2001)