People v. Herrnkind — 49 A.D.3d 555

Majority

p. 555

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Julie Herrnkind, Appellant.

[851 NYS2d 886]

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 , 621 [1983]; People v Conway, 6 NY3d 869 , 872 [2006]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power (see 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 [2006]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 , 495 [1987]).

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s application for the appointment, pursuant to County Law § 722-c, of a purported expert in the area of coerced, false confessions, since the defendant failed to establish that the expert’s proposed testimony was necessary or relevant to a significant issue at trial (see People v Cronin, 60 NY2d 430 , 433 [1983]; People v Casiano, 40 AD3d 528 , 529 [2007], lv denied

p. 556

9 NY3d 990 [2007]; People v Oquendo, 250 AD2d 419 [1998]; cf. Ake v Oklahoma, 470 US 68 , 74 [1985]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Spolzino, J.P., Santucci, Angiolillo and Balkin, JJ., concur.

Cases cited

People v. Contes 60 NY2d 620 N.Y. 1983-09-01 at 621 p. 555
People v. Conway 6 NY3d 869 N.Y. 2006-05-04 at 872 p. 555
People v. Romero 7 NY3d 633 N.Y. 2006-11-21 p. 555
People v. Bleakley 69 NY2d 490 N.Y. 1987-05-07 at 495 p. 555
People v. Cronin 60 NY2d 430 N.Y. 1983-11-01 at 433 p. 555
People v. Casiano 40 AD3d 528 N.Y. App. Div. 2007-05-31 at 529 p. 555
People v. Oquendo 250 AD2d 419 N.Y. App. Div. 1998-05-12 p. 556
Ake v. Oklahoma 470 US 68 SCOTUS 1985-02-26 at 74 p. 556
People v. Suitte 90 AD2d 80 N.Y. App. Div. 1982-11-22 p. 556