THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v TONY HARRISON, Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York
October 6, 2005
22 AD3d 236 | 803 NYS2d 5
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The proof connecting defendant with the crime consisted almost entirely of DNA evidence, and defendant now argues that the evidence was legally insufficient for this reason. This claim, however, is not preserved for appellate review as it was never advanced at trial (People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]). In any event, if we were to review defendant‘s claim, we would reject it. Here, the DNA evidence was particularly powerful and established defendant‘s identity beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Wesley, 83 NY2d 417, 420 [1994]; People v Rush, 242 AD2d 108 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 860 [1998]; see also People v Yancey, 24 NY2d 864 [1969] [fingerprint evidence sufficient to establish identity]).
The court properly denied defendant‘s motion to dismiss the indictment as time-barred. The People established that “the
We have considered and rejected defendant‘s remaining claims. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Ellerin, Gonzalez and McGuire, JJ.
