From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Horn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 7, 2003
302 A.D.2d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

KA 99-05239

February 7, 2003.

Appeal from a judgment of Monroe County Court (Marks, J.), entered December 16, 1998, convicting defendant after a jury trial of, inter alia, burglary in the third degree.

MARK D. FUNK, ROCHESTER, For Defendant-appellant.

HOWARD R. RELIN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (PATRICK H. FIERRO OF COUNSEL), For Plaintiff-respondent.

PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., GREEN, SCUDDER, KEHOE, AND LAWTON, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:

Defendant made only a general motion to dismiss at the close of the People's case and thus failed to preserve for our review his contention that his conviction of burglary in the third degree (Penal Law § 140.20) and petit larceny (§ 155.25) is not supported by legally sufficient evidence (see People v. Finger, 95 N.Y.2d 894, 895; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19; People v. Smith, 275 A.D.2d 1017). In any event, that contention lacks merit. There is a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences that could lead a rational person to the conclusion that defendant knowingly entered the homeowners' garage unlawfully and stole property (see People v. Prober, 298 A.D.2d 966; People v. Bills, 278 A.D.2d 836, 836-837, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 780; see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495).


Summaries of

People v. Horn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 7, 2003
302 A.D.2d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Horn

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Plaintiff-respondent, v. KENNETH HORN…

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

Date published: Feb 7, 2003

Citations

302 A.D.2d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
754 N.Y.S.2d 618

Citing Cases

People v. Powell

In his main and pro se supplemental briefs, defendant contends that the evidence is not legally sufficient to…

People v. Plume

In any event, those challenges are lacking in merit. The evidence is legally sufficient to establish that…