From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mayi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 22, 1993
198 A.D.2d 444 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

November 22, 1993

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Harrington, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of resisting arrest beyond a reasonable doubt, notwithstanding the defendant's acquittal of all other charges under the indictment (see, People v SiMartin, 135 A.D.2d 591; People v Maturevitz, 149 A.D.2d 908; cf., People v Saitta, 79 A.D.2d 994; see also, People v Peacock, 68 N.Y.2d 675; People v Collins, 178 A.D.2d 789; People v Williams, 25 N.Y.2d 86; People v Bertino, 93 A.D.2d 972).

The defendant's contention that the court improperly admitted testimony as to a statement she had uttered during the incident in question because she was not provided with written notice of the prosecution's intent to use such statement at trial is without merit (see, CPL 710.30 [a]; People v Greer, 42 N.Y.2d 170; People v Wells, 133 A.D.2d 385; see also, People v Kimbell, 169 A.D.2d 880; People v Stewart, 160 A.D.2d 966).

We have examined the defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Sullivan and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Mayi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 22, 1993
198 A.D.2d 444 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Mayi

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOELIA MAYI, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 22, 1993

Citations

198 A.D.2d 444 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
605 N.Y.S.2d 909

Citing Cases

People v. Weaver

ent to convey the correct rules to be applied. Defendant was not entitled to the precise phraseology he…

People v. Thomas

Defendant's challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence are unpreserved for appellate review because he…