Cargando…
Fuente: Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab (static.case.law); New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division; 115 A.D.3d 535; 981 N.Y.S.2d 728. Datos: https://static.case.law/ad3d/115/cases/0535-01.json. Opinión judicial de EE.UU. sin restricciones conocidas de uso: CAP levantó las restricciones el 2024-03-01 (prensa); el espejo HF free-law declara cc0-1.0; NO c… Abrir la fuente
Cargando el texto completo…
People v. Daisley, 115 A.D.3d 535 (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 2014) Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered March 20, 2012, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 6 months concurrent with 5 years’ probation, unanimously affirmed. The matter is remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5). The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations. The evidence supports the inference that defendant shared his companion’s intent to cause physical injury to the victim and intentionally aided his companion by either holding or blocking the victim’s path of retreat while his companion cut the victim’s face with a box cutter (see Matter of Tatiana N., 73 AD3d 186, 191 [1st Dept 2010]). Even if the jury credited defendant’s testimony that he did not know that his companion was going to use a box cutter against the victim, the jury could have rationally concluded from defendant’s continued participation in the criminal activity after the box cutter was used that he shared the requisite intent for the crime (see id.). Defendant’s conduct toward the victim and his departure and subsequent return to the scene provided further evidence of defendant’s community of purpose…
Fuente: Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab (static.case.law); New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division; 115 A.D.3d 535; 981 N.Y.S.2d 728. Datos: https://static.case.law/ad3d/115/cases/0535-01.json. Opinión judicial de EE.UU. sin restricciones conocidas de uso: CAP levantó las restricciones el 2024-03-01 (prensa); el espejo HF free-law declara cc0-1.0; NO c… Abrir la fuente
Cargando el texto completo…
People v. Daisley, 115 A.D.3d 535 (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 2014) Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered March 20, 2012, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 6 months concurrent with 5 years’ probation, unanimously affirmed. The matter is remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5). The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations. The evidence supports the inference that defendant shared his companion’s intent to cause physical injury to the victim and intentionally aided his companion by either holding or blocking the victim’s path of retreat while his companion cut the victim’s face with a box cutter (see Matter of Tatiana N., 73 AD3d 186, 191 [1st Dept 2010]). Even if the jury credited defendant’s testimony that he did not know that his companion was going to use a box cutter against the victim, the jury could have rationally concluded from defendant’s continued participation in the criminal activity after the box cutter was used that he shared the requisite intent for the crime (see id.). Defendant’s conduct toward the victim and his departure and subsequent return to the scene provided further evidence of defendant’s community of purpose…