People v. Perkins
Decision Date | 10 December 2009 |
Docket Number | 1716,3963/07 |
Citation | 890 N.Y.S.2d 528,68 A.D.3d 494,2009 NY Slip Op 9146 |
Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANTHONY PERKINS, Appellant. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
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 determinations concerning identification and credibility. Defendant was reliably identified by crime victims, inculpated by an acquaintance, and connected to the crimes by extensive circumstantial evidence including cell phone records. The physical injury element of first-degree burglary was established by evidence that defendant hit the victim on the nose with a pistol and knocked her down, causing bruising and pain in her nose and shoulder which led her to take pain relievers for a week. The jury could reasonably infer that these injuries caused "more than slight or trivial pain" (People v Chiddick, 8 NY3d 445, 447 [2007]), and went beyond "petty slaps, shoves, kicks and the like" (Matter of Philip A., 49 NY2d 198, 200 [1980]).
The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. Defendant's sister consented to a search of her apartment, where defendant had been temporarily living. In a closet, the police found an imitation pistol, along with clothing belonging to defendant, wrapped in a bedsheet. For the first time on appeal, defendant argues that his sister lacked actual or apparent authority to consent to a search of this bundle, which he characterizes as a container holding his personal belongings (see People v Gonzalez, 88 NY2d 289 [1996]). Defendant's only suppression argument was that the seizure was the fruit of an unlawful arrest. Accordingly, the People...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Nelson, 106724
...v. Hawkins , 130 A.D.3d 426, 426–427, 13 N.Y.S.3d 60 [2015], lv. denied 26 N.Y.3d 1088, 44 N.E.3d 943 [2015] ; People v. Perkins , 68 A.D.3d 494, 495, 890 N.Y.S.2d 528 [2009], lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 891, 903 N.Y.S.2d 779, 929 N.E.2d 1014 [2010] ; People v. Kirby , 280 A.D.2d 775, 777, 721 N.Y......
-
Perkins v. Lavalley
...In Re Philip A., 400 N.E.2d 358, 359 (N.Y. 1980)). The Court concluded, however, that the sentence was excessive. See People v. Perkins, 890 N.Y.S.2d 528 (App. Div. 2009). Accordingly, the Appellate Division modified petitioner's judgment of conviction, ordering that the sentences for secon......
-
People v. Black
...degree ( see Penal Law §§ 110, 160.10[2][a]; People v. Chiddick, 8 N.Y.3d 445, 834 N.Y.S.2d 710, 866 N.E.2d 1039; People v. Perkins, 68 A.D.3d 494, 890 N.Y.S.2d 528). The evidence also was legally sufficient to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant's guilt of criminal possessi......
-
People v. Hawkins
...“in response to a protest by a party” (CPL 470.05[2] ; see also Jimenez, 109 A.D.3d at 764, 972 N.Y.S.2d 20 ; People v. Perkins, 68 A.D.3d 494, 495, 890 N.Y.S.2d 528 [1st Dept 2009], lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 891, 903 N.Y.S.2d 779, 929 N.E.2d 1014 [2010] ). If anything, the court expressly decli......