From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Tucker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 8, 1993
190 A.D.2d 763 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

February 8, 1993

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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 beyond a reasonable doubt. An eyewitness testified that as he was running, he heard three shots. He turned around and saw the defendant holding a gun. The complainant testified that he saw the defendant with a gun in his hand approximately 15 feet away. The defendant fired three shots, hitting the complainant in the chest, arm, and leg. The defendant contends that the prosecution witnesses were not credible. 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 was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15). Sullivan, J.P., O'Brien, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Tucker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 8, 1993
190 A.D.2d 763 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Tucker

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RICHARD TUCKER…

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

Date published: Feb 8, 1993

Citations

190 A.D.2d 763 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
593 N.Y.S.2d 296

Citing Cases

People v. Tyes

We also reject defendant's contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction of…