People v. Sorenson
Opinion of the Court
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt. The People also disproved his alibi defense beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Campbell, 70 NY2d 724). The People presented, inter
The record supports the trial court’s denial of the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPL 330.30. The defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the evidence he offered in support of this motion could not have been discovered prior to trial and that it would probably, not merely possibly, change the result if a retrial were granted (see, CPL 330.30 [3]; People v Aulla, 207 AD2d 497).
We note that in the absence of a certificate granting leave to appeal from the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment of conviction, this Court is without jurisdiction to consider his purported appeal therefrom (see, People v Harris, 107 AD2d 761).
We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Santucci and Krausman, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.