People v. Cannon

• Decision Date: 05 February 1996
• Citation: 224 A.D.2d 439,638 N.Y.S.2d 324
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Phillip L. CANNON, Appellant. Second Department
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 324

638 N.Y.S.2d 324

224 A.D.2d 439

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Phillip L. CANNON, Appellant.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division,

Second Department.

Feb. 5, 1996.

Daniel L. Greenberg, New York City (Kannan Sundaram, of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens (Steven J. Chananie, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Lisa Marlow, of counsel; Nora A. Colangelo, on the brief), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered July 27, 1993, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), robbery in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's motion for a trial order of dismissal was not specific enough to preserve the issue of legal sufficiency for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Pinder, 199 A.D.2d 544, 608 N.Y.S.2d 98). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Dixon, 174 A.D.2d 689, 571 N.Y.S.2d 544; People v. Jamison, 173 A.D.2d 341, 569 N.Y.S.2d 709; People v. Robinson, 161 A.D.2d 676, 555 N.Y.S.2d 448). 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 (CPL 470.15[5].

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).

MANGANO, P.J., and MILLER, THOMPSON and JOY, JJ., concur.