From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Whyte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 9, 1998
255 A.D.2d 407 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

November 9, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt because the complainant's testimony was inconsistent, unreliable, and uncorroborated by other evidence is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). 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 it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses ( see, People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record ( see, People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see, CPL 470.15).

The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in discharging a juror due to illness and replacing her with an alternate juror. The record demonstrates that the court conducted a "reasonably thorough" inquiry into the matter (CPL 270.35 [a]; People v. Page, 72 N.Y.2d 69), which revealed that the juror had a medical problem. She was unsure as to when or whether she would be able to return to service, but indicated that she would be unable to resume jury duty that day and might require a medical procedure. She also explained that even if she did return, she might experience problems in the future due to her condition. Given these circumstances, the discharge of the juror was proper ( see, People v. Males, 227 A.D.2d 645; People v. Woodard, 223 A.D.2d 746; People v. Velazquez, 211 A.D.2d 471; People v. Jamison, 203 A.D.2d 385).

Sullivan, J. P., Altman, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Whyte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 9, 1998
255 A.D.2d 407 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Whyte

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARC WHYTE, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 9, 1998

Citations

255 A.D.2d 407 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
681 N.Y.S.2d 46

Citing Cases

People v. Neal

Those contentions are not preserved for our review ( see People v. Fox, 172 A.D.2d 218, 220, lv denied 78…

Neal v. Giambruno

The court conducted a "reasonably thorough inquiry" before discharging the juror and replacing him with an…