People v. Barrios
| Decision Date | 23 July 1990 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Paul BARRIOS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Philip L. Weinstein, New York City (Mary C. Rothwell, of counsel), for appellant.
John J. Santucci, Dist. Atty., Kew Gardens (Gary Fidel, of counsel; Nora A. Colangelo and Merri Turk Lasky, on the brief), for respondent.
Before THOMPSON, J.P., and LAWRENCE, HARWOOD and BALLETTA, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cooperman, J.), rendered May 16, 1988, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant stands convicted of the robbery of the owner of a Queens furniture store committed with the assistance of an unapprehended accomplice. On appeal, the defendant contends that his guilt was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt because of inconsistencies and discrepancies in the testimony of the People's witnesses. Although certain discrepancies existed between the arresting officer's memo book and his testimony at trial, and the witnesses's accounts of the incident varied slightly, the apparent differences were not so great as to render their testimony incredible. In any event, the conflicting testimony presented a question of credibility for the trier-of-fact to resolve in the context of the totality of the evidence (see, People v. Jackson, 65 N.Y.2d 265, 491 N.Y.S.2d 138, 480 N.E.2d 727). It is well settled that issues of the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be accorded the evidence presented are primarily within the province of the trier-of-fact whose determination will not be overturned lightly on appeal (see, People v. Gruttola, 43 N.Y.2d 116, 400 N.Y.S.2d 788, 371 N.E.2d 506; People v. Mustafa, 132 A.D.2d 628, 517 N.Y.S.2d 781; People v. Bauer, 113 A.D.2d 543, 551, 497 N.Y.S.2d 115). Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt. 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[5].
We further find that the report of the arresting officer's taped telephone call to the emergency 911 number did not constitute Rosario material (People v. Rosario, 9 N.Y.2d 286, 213 N.Y.S.2d 448, 173 N.E.2d 881) in the context of this case, because the substance of the report did not relate to the subject matter of the witness's trial testimony (see, CPL 240.45[1][a]; People v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Deas
...matter of the reports was unrelated to any testimony given by the officer who made the reports (see, CPL 240.45[1][a]; People v. Barrios, 163 A.D.2d 579, 559 N.Y.S.2d 31; People v. Melendez, 149 A.D.2d 918, 919, 540 N.Y.S.2d 51). Nor did the failure to turn over the reports constitute a Bra......
-
People v. LaSalle
...N.Y.S.2d 412; People v. Goldman, 175 A.D.2d 723, 573 N.Y.S.2d 282; People v. Deas, 174 A.D.2d 751, 571 N.Y.S.2d 778; People v. Barrios, 163 A.D.2d 579, 559 N.Y.S.2d 31; People v. Fluellen, 132 A.D.2d 455, 517 N.Y.S.2d 512). The majority's decision does not state a rule contrary to this In g......
-
People v. Gonzalez
...People v. Goldman, 175 A.D.2d 723, 725, 573 N.Y.S.2d 282, lv. denied 78 N.Y.2d 1076, 577 N.Y.S.2d 239, 583 N.E.2d 951; People v. Barrios, 163 A.D.2d 579, 559 N.Y.S.2d 31, lv. denied 77 N.Y.2d 875, 568 N.Y.S.2d 918, 571 N.E.2d 88). Here, the prosecutor contended that the portions of the docu......
-
People v. Greaves
...defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932; People v. Barrios, 163 A.D.2d 579, 559 N.Y.S.2d 31). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the w......