From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Barry

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1995
215 A.D.2d 397 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

May 1, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).

The trial court did not err by failing to give an expanded identification charge. The charge that was given properly instructed the jury about the People's burden of proving identification beyond a reasonable doubt and the general factors relevant to the witnesses' veracity and the accuracy of their observations (see, People v Washington, 209 A.D.2d 733).

We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Sullivan, J.P., O'Brien, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Barry

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1995
215 A.D.2d 397 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Barry

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARLON BARRY, Appellant

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

Date published: May 1, 1995

Citations

215 A.D.2d 397 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
626 N.Y.S.2d 977

Citing Cases

People v. Love

Whether the charge is appropriate in an individual case is a matter for the Trial Judge's discretion ( see,…

People v. Delisser

"Whether the charge is appropriate in an individual case is * * * a matter for the Trial Judge's discretion"…