The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The jury could properly reject defendant's intoxication defense, since there was ample evidence that he was not intoxicated at the time of the incident.
Although the trial court should have excluded an irrelevant statement by defendant, the error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt (see, People v Crimmins,
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.
