Joseph Gruttola v. Edward R. Hammock, Chairman of the New York Board of Parole, Respondent

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting insufficiency claim, holding that jury was entitled to believe prosecution witnesses despite inconsistencies in their testimony
• rejecting insufficient evidence claim raised by habeas petitioner because jury was entitled to believe prosecution’s witnesses despite inconsistencies in their testimony and the prosecution’s evidence
• evidence sufficient where jury credited prosecution witnesses’ testimony “despite some inconsistencies between their trial testimony and prior statements to the police and to the grand jury”
• evidence sufficient where jury credited prosecution witnesses’ testimony “despite some inconsistencies between their trial testimony and prior statements to the police, and to the grand jury”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).