From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gantt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 13, 2002
294 A.D.2d 446 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2000-09625

Argued April 25, 2002.

May 13, 2002.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), rendered October 5, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and menacing in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Joshua M. Levine of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Ellen C. Abbot, and Jennifer Haggan of counsel; Kimberley C. Nielsen on the brief), for respondent.

Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, LEO F. McGINITY, HOWARD MILLER, JJ.


ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence both because the security officers at the Caldor store where he shoplifted merchandise had a motive to testify falsely that he possessed a gun, and because the testimony of these witnesses was implausible in light of the evidence, including the store's surveillance videotapes. However, 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 jury, 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 verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15).

The Supreme Court also properly exercised its discretion in precluding the defendant from admitting a model flashlight into evidence, as it significantly differed in appearance from the one that he alleged was in his hand during the incident (see People v. Langley, 232 A.D.2d 427; People v. Pike, 131 A.D.2d 890, 891).

FLORIO, J.P., O'BRIEN, McGINITY and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Gantt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 13, 2002
294 A.D.2d 446 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

People v. Gantt

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. VERNON GANTT, appellant

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

Date published: May 13, 2002

Citations

294 A.D.2d 446 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
743 N.Y.S.2d 120

Citing Cases

State v. Simpkins

In reviewing a claim of legal insufficiency, the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the…

People v. Jackson

In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v. Contes, 60…