People v. Drysdale
| Decision Date | 17 June 2002 |
| Citation | 744 N.Y.S.2d 855,295 A.D.2d 533 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>PATRICK DRYSDALE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the indictment charging him with sodomy in the first degree was rendered duplicitous by the trial testimony was not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Bumbury, 263 AD2d 512; People v Cosby, 222 AD2d 690), and we decline to reach this issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Davis
...indictment were rendered duplicitous by trial testimony is not preserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Drysdale, 295 A.D.2d 533, 533, 744 N.Y.S.2d 855), and we decline to reach the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction ( see CPL 470.15[6]; Peopl......
- People v. Duncan