People v Jones

Summary

The Appellate Division, Third Department affirmed Brandon Jones's convictions for two counts of second-degree burglary and six counts of second-degree robbery. The court held that accomplice testimony was sufficiently corroborated, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence, and the defendant's other challenges—including indictment signing, juror challenges, prosecutorial remarks, jury instructions, ineffective assistance, and sentencing—were either unpreserved, meritless, or both.

Holdings

1. The evidence was legally sufficient to support defendant's convictions because the accomplice testimony was supported by independent evidence tending to connect defendant with the commission of the crimes.
2. The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence.
3. The challenge to the assistant district attorney's signature on the indictment was unpreserved, and in any event the signature satisfied the statutory requirements.
4. Supreme Court properly denied defendant's challenges for cause.
5. Defendant's claim concerning the prosecutor's summation and PowerPoint presentation was unpreserved; considered alternatively, the challenged comments did not cause substantial prejudice or deny due process.
6. Defendant received meaningful representation and was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel.
7. The challenge to the accomplice-corroboration instruction was unpreserved, and the instruction nevertheless adequately conveyed the governing legal principles.
8. Defendant's sentence was not harsh or excessive.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support defendant's convictions where the identification evidence included accomplice testimony.
2. Whether the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.
3. Whether the indictment was invalid because it was signed by an assistant district attorney rather than the elected district attorney.
4. Whether Supreme Court improperly denied defendant's challenges for cause to prospective jurors.
5. Whether prosecutorial comments during summation and a PowerPoint presentation deprived defendant of a fair trial.
6. Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the prosecutor's comments.
7. Whether the jury instruction concerning corroboration of accomplice testimony was erroneous.
8. Whether defendant's sentence was harsh or excessive.

Disposition

affirmed