People v. Torres

Decision Date17 June 2004
Docket Number3917.
Citation2004 NY Slip Op 05333,779 N.Y.S.2d 34,8 A.D.3d 123
PartiesTHE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAYSON TORRES, Appellant.
CourtNew 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 Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury's determinations concerning identification. Each of the two robbery victims, one of whom had seen defendant on various occasions before and after the crime, had an ample opportunity to observe the robber and each made a reliable identification.

When defendant requested an identification charge, the court responded that its general charge would cover that subject, and it invited defendant to submit a more specific request and to inspect the court's proposed charge prior to summations. However, defendant did not make a further request to charge, and, after the court charged the jury, he did not make any of the arguments he raises on appeal. Accordingly, his present claims are unpreserved (People v Whalen, 59 NY2d 273, 280 [1983]), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that the court's charge, which not only instructed the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Ortiz v. Barkley
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • June 3, 2008
    ...that the Appellate Division appeared to believe that Mrs. Trinh had seen petitioner before the robbery. People v. Torres, 8 A.D.3d 123, 123, 779 N.Y.S.2d 34, 35 (N.Y.App.Div.2004). As to ground three, petitioner disputed various findings of fact and offered alternative interpretations and e......
  • People v. Soto
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • February 27, 2024
    ...for supplemental charges (see People v. Whalen, 59 N.Y.2d 273, 280, 464 N.Y.S.2d 454, 451 N.E.2d 212 [1983]; People v. Torres, 8 A.D.3d 123, 123, 779 N.Y.S.2d 34 [1st Dept. 2004], lv denied 3 N.Y.3d 712, 785 N.Y.S.2d 40, 818 N.E.2d 682 [2004]). We decline to review the claim in the interest......
  • Morton v. New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • June 17, 2004
  • People v. Soto
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • February 27, 2024
    ...873, 874 [1995]), and "included much of the same information that would be contained in a typical expanded identification charge" (Torres, 8 A.D.3d at 123). ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT