SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
December 31, 2008
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
GEORGE BURROUGHS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (John J. Brunetti, A.J.), rendered March 31, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (two counts), petit larceny and attempted petit larceny.
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
PRESENT: HURLBUTT, J.P., MARTOCHE, SMITH, PERADOTTO, AND GREEN, JJ.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of two counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.25) and one count each of petit larceny (§ 155.25) and attempted petit larceny (§§ 110.00, 155.25). We reject defendant's contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. Although there was conflicting testimony and thus "an acquittal would not have been unreasonable" (People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348; see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495), we conclude that, "[b]ased on the weight of the credible evidence, . . . the jury was justified in finding the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" (Danielson, 9 NY3d at 348; see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 642-643). " Great deference is to be accorded to the fact-finder's resolution of credibility issues based upon its superior vantage point and its opportunity to view witnesses, observe demeanor and hear the testimony' " (People v Gritzke, 292 AD2d 805, 805-806, lv denied 98 NY2d 697), and we perceive no basis for disturbing the jury's credibility determinations (see People v Reddick, 43 AD3d 1334, 1335-1336, lv denied 10 NY3d 815).
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.