People v. Walker
| Decision Date | 15 March 1993 |
| Citation | 191 A.D.2d 603,595 N.Y.S.2d 213 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Oscar WALKER, Jr., a/k/a Jake Williams, Appellant. Second Department |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Alan Schneier, Valley Stream, for appellant.
Carl A. Vergari, Dist. Atty., White Plains (Fredric I. Green and Richard Longworth Hecht, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BRACKEN, J.P., and LAWRENCE, EIBER and PIZZUTO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant of a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Silverman, J.), rendered May 4, 1990, convicting him of grand larceny in the fourth degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress statements made by him to law enforcement authorities.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The evidence adduced at the Huntley hearing established that the incriminating statements made by the defendant to the arresting officers, to wit, "It wasn't me, it was Butch" and "I was there, but I didn't do it" were spontaneous, and not made as a result of police questioning or coercion (see, People v. Rivers, 56 N.Y.2d 476, 453 N.Y.S.2d 156, 438 N.E.2d 862).
Viewing the evidence at trial in a light most favorable to the People (People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the conviction. Moreover, 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 trier of fact, who saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94, 68 N.E. 112). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, 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].
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Stokes
...(see, People v. Hylton, 198 A.D.2d 301, 603 N.Y.S.2d 560, lv. denied 82 N.Y.2d 925, 610 N.Y.S.2d 177, 632 N.E.2d 487; People v. Walker, 191 A.D.2d 603, 595 N.Y.S.2d 213, lv. denied 81 N.Y.2d 1021, 600 N.Y.S.2d 210, 616 N.E.2d Judgment unanimously affirmed. ...
-
People v. Van Akin
...the evidence presented are entitled to great deference (see, People v. Davis, 191 A.D.2d 705, 595 N.Y.S.2d 792; People v. Walker, 191 A.D.2d 603, 595 N.Y.S.2d 213, lv. denied 81 N.Y.2d 1021, 600 N.Y.S.2d 210, 616 N.E.2d 867; People v. Adams, 164 A.D.2d 546, 549, 565 N.Y.S.2d 821, lv. denied......
-
People v. Wedekind
...inasmuch as the court's determination that defendant did not make such a request is supported by the record (see, People v. Walker, 191 A.D.2d 603, 595 N.Y.S.2d 213, lv. denied 81 N.Y.2d 1021, 600 N.Y.S.2d 210, 616 N.E.2d 867). Defendant's further argument that his 6th Amendment right to co......
- People v. Vasco