Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered April 16, 2007, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree and resisting arrest under Indictment No. 2089-06, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, and (2) a judgment of the same court rendered July 25, 2007, convicting him of assault in the second degree under Indictment No. 716-07, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
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.
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., STEVEN W. FISHER, FRED T. SANTUCCI & RUTH C. BALKIN, JJ.
ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.
Viewing the evidence adduced at the trial of Indictment No. 2089-06 in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410, cert denied 542 US 946; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt on Indictment No. 2089-06 was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633).
The sentences imposed were not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
SKELOS, J.P., FISHER, SANTUCCI and BALKIN, JJ., concur.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw ...