People v. Van Glahn

• Decision Date: 23 October 2007
• Docket Number: 2005-11986.
• Citation: People v. Van Glahn, 44 A.D.3d 972, 845 N.Y.S.2d 743, 2007 NY Slip Op 8097 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LEE VAN GLAHN, Appellant.

44 A.D.3d 972

845 N.Y.S.2d 743

2007 NY Slip Op 08097

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v.LEE VAN GLAHN, Appellant.

2005-11986.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department.

Decided October 23, 2007.

Appeal by the defendant

from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lott, J.), rendered November 15, 2005, convicting him of murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree, attempted rape in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, and assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted of murder in the first degree and murder in second degree with respect to the homicides of two prostitutes, respectively, and attempted rape in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, and assault in the second degree of a third prostitute.On appeal, he argues that the evidence was not legally sufficient to sustain his conviction for either murder or for the attempted rape.To the extent that the defendant argues that the evidence was not legally sufficient to prove that he intended to kill Arlene Brumfield, his argument is not preserved for appellate review (seeCPL 470.05 [2];People v Johnson,22 AD3d 600[2005];People v Rourke,4 AD3d 377[2004]).In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution(seePeople v Contes,60 NY2d 620[1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as to all of the crimes described above.Moreover, upon the exercise of...