Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta People v. Betancourt 68 N.Y.2d 707

← Cases

People v. Betancourt

68 N.Y.2d 707 Court N.Y. Decision date 1986-07-03 English

Contents

Majority

p. 707
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jorge Betancourt, Appellant.
Decided July 3, 1986
p. 709
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Stephanie T. Knowles and Philip L. Weinstein for appellant.
John J. Santucci, District Attorney (John Castellano of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The Appellate Division applied the correct standard for appellate review of the legal sufficiency of a wholly circumstantial evidence case. The evidence adduced at trial must be viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, giving it the benefit of every reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom, and the court reviewing the jury verdict must "determine whether the jury reasonably concluded” that the defen

p. 710
dant’s guilt was proven to a moral certainty (People v Marin, 65 NY2d 741 , 742; People v Giuliano, 65 NY2d 766 , 768). Moreover, we agree with the Appellate Division that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict of guilty of burglary in the third degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree (see, People v Bay, 67 NY2d 787 ; People v Levine, 65 NY2d 845 ).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr., concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cases cited