Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017

People v. Blunt

People v. Blunt
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided April 28, 2017 · Carni, Dejoseph, Nemoyer, Smith, Troutman
149 A.D.3d 1573; 52 N.Y.S.3d 801
People v. Blunt

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Appeal from a judgment of the Wyoming County Court (Michael M. Mohun, J.), rendered September 16, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of promoting prison contraband in the first degree (Penal Law § 205.25 [2]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, we conclude that the evidence is legally sufficient to support the conviction (see People v Mansilla, 143 AD3d 1263, 1263 [2016]; People v Davey, 134 AD3d 1448, 1449 [2015]). Viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), the evidence provided a “valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could lead a rational person to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence at trial” (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]), i.e., that defendant possessed a flat, sharpened piece of metal that he wielded during a prison fight. Moreover, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime as charged to the jury (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Hood, 145 AD3d 1565, 1565-1566 [2016]; Mansilla, 143 AD3d at 1263; see generally Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 495). We have considered defendant’s challenge to the severity of his sentence and conclude that it is without merit.

Present — Smith, J.P., Carni, DeJoseph, NeMoyer and Troutman, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.