AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RICHARD LIDDELL, Appellant.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's arguments, the prosecutor did not withhold any information from the Grand Jury which would have materially influenced its investigation (see, People v Spinelli, 165 A.D.2d 888). Accordingly, the court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment.

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 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, 85). We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Balletta, J.P., O'Brien, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. LIDDELL
(Mar 16, 1992)