Judgment unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum:
Defendant contends that his conviction of arson in the third degree, based solely upon circumstantial evidence, was not supported by legally sufficient evidence. We disagree. In considering defendant's contention, we must assume that the jury credited the prosecution witnesses and drew all reasonable inferences in the prosecution's favor (see, People v Kennedy,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.