From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of George

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 2, 1992
187 A.D.2d 427 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

November 2, 1992

Appeal from the Family Court, Queens County (Torres, J.).


Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The appellant contends that the Family Court erred in summarily denying the suppression of physical evidence without a hearing. We disagree. In his affirmation in support of suppression, the appellant's counsel asserted that "[t]he [appellant] was stopped while in the Lefrak City housing complex. The [appellant] denies being involved in any unlawful activity at the time he was seized". On oral argument before the Family Court, counsel merely asserted that "there was no probable cause to seize this youngster". We find these assertions to be inadequate to warrant a hearing, since they "stated only conclusory legal grounds for the relief requested, which were not supported by sufficient allegations of fact" (People v Jordan, 122 A.D.2d 224, 224-225; see also, People v Rodriguez, 162 A.D.2d 478; People v Pavesi, 144 A.D.2d 392).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The appellant's contentions with respect to the undercover officer who made the drug purchase and to the testimony of the appellant's alibi witness concern issues of credibility and the weight to be accorded the evidence presented. However, resolutions of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the trier of fact, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94). 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). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the finding of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (cf., CPL 470.15; see, People v Green, 185 A.D.2d 992; People v DeJesus, 177 A.D.2d 434; People v Vickers, 177 A.D.2d 608; People v Reynolds, 171 A.D.2d 707). Mangano, P.J., Sullivan, Balletta and Miller, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of George

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 2, 1992
187 A.D.2d 427 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Matter of George

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of GEORGE J., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 2, 1992

Citations

187 A.D.2d 427 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Citing Cases

People v. Dixon

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. We find that the branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was…

People v. Baez

Further, the court properly denied the defendant's motion to suppress physical evidence, without a hearing,…