People v. GolsonPeople v. Golson
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by reversing that part convicting defendant of burglary in the second degree and dismissing count eight of the indictment as and modified the judgment is affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of, inter alia, two counts of conspiracy in the fourth degree (
Contrary to defendant‘s contention, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the remaining crimes as charged to the jury (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Defendant was identified by only two prosecution witnesses; one is a drug addict who also was indicted for these crimes and who received a favorable plea agreement in exchange for her testimony, and the other has a lengthy criminal record. Thus, we agree with defendant that another result would not have been unreasonable (see id. at 495). Nevertheless, we further conclude that, upon weighing the “relative strength of conflicting inferences that may be drawn from the testimony,” the jury did not fail to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded (id.).
Because he failed to object in a timely manner to the prosecutor‘s failure to correct the testimony of a prosecution
We also reject defendant‘s contention that the court erred in permitting the People to present the testimony of a police witness regarding the out-of-court identification of defendant by a prosecution witness (see
SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CARNI AND SCONIERS, JJ.