People v. Green
| Citation | 658 N.Y.S.2d 133,240 A.D.2d 513 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Alvin GREEN, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 09 June 1997 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Carol Kahn, New York City, for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn (Roseann B. MacKechnie, Jodi L. Mandel, and Jonathan Inker, of counsel), for respondent.
Before PIZZUTO, J.P., and SANTUCCI, FRIEDMANN and LUCIANO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Aiello, J.), rendered June 14, 1995, convicting him of manslaughter in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant maintains that the jury's rejection of his defense of justification was against the weight of the evidence. This contention is without merit. Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 96, 68 N.E. 112; People v. Sneed, 233 A.D.2d 410, 650 N.Y.S.2d 571; People v. Lemaire, 187 A.D.2d 532, 533, 589 N.Y.S.2d 919). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v. Sneed, supra; People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88, 353 N.Y.S.2d 500). 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] ).
There is no merit to the defendant's further contention that the court improperly adjudicated him a second violent felony offender on the ground that the predicate felony was based upon a coerced plea of guilty. It was not coercive for the court to have remarked in the prior case that if the defendant were to be convicted after trial, it would impose a sentence close to the maximum allowable under the law (see, People v. Jones, 232 A.D.2d 505, 648 N.Y.S.2d 331; People v. Cornelio, 227 A.D.2d 248, 642 N.Y.S.2d 648; People v. Stephens, 188 A.D.2d 345, 346, 591 N.Y.S.2d 25).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 85-86, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).
The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Smith, 222 A.D.2d 535, 635 N.Y.S.2d 538), and, in any event, is without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Thomas
...knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made (see, People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170; People v. Green, 240 A.D.2d 513, 658 N.Y.S.2d 133). The defendant waived the claim that her sentence is harsh and excessive by waiving the right to appeal (see, People v. Hid......
-
People v. Hoppe
...of 20 years to life given his persistent felon status, such admonitions do not amount to coercion (see, e.g., People v. Green, --- A.D.2d ----, ----, 658 N.Y.S.2d 133, 134). We have considered defendant's remaining claims and find that they are either unpreserved for our review or are lacki......
-
People v. Akridge
...court to inform defendant that he faced consecutive sentences if he went to trial on two separate indictments (compare, People v. Green, 240 A.D.2d 513, 658 N.Y.S.2d 133, lv. denied 90 N.Y.2d 940, 664 N.Y.S.2d 758, 687 N.E.2d 655, with People v. Min, --- A.D.2d ----, 671 N.Y.S.2d The record......
- People v. Gilmore