Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The People, etc., respondent, v. Shawn Joseph, appellant.
Submitted-May 7, 2010
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Sullivan, J.), rendered November 13, 2007, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts), assault in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his challenge to the legal sufficiency of the identification evidence (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 492). Although the defendant raised an issue as to the sufficiency of the identification evidence in his motion to set aside the verdict, made at sentencing, raising a contention for the first time in such a motion does not preserve it for appellate review (see People v. Padro, 75 N.Y.2d 820, 821; People v. Stewart, 71 AD3d 797; People v. Sadler, 49 AD3d 670). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that there was legally sufficient evidence of the defendant's identification as one of the perpetrators. Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15(5), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Romero, 7 NY3d 633).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). The defendant's claim that the sentence imposed improperly penalized him for exercising his right to trial is without merit (see People v. Martinez, 289 A.D.2d 259, 260).
MASTRO, J.P., SANTUCCI, CHAMBERS and ROMAN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 2007-10747 (Ind.No. 7359 /06)
Decided: June 01, 2010
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)