Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People of the State of New York v. Eugene Jenkins

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE TERM: 2nd, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


March 16, 2011

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
RESPONDENT,
v.
EUGENE JENKINS,
APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Alexander Jeong, J.), rendered March 30, 2009.

People v Jenkins (Eugene)

Decided on March 16, 2011

Appellate Term, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

PRESENT:PESCE, P.J., GOLIA and STEINHARDT, JJ

The judgment convicted defendant, after a non-jury trial, of harassment in the second degree and attempted assault in the third degree.

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Defendant was convicted, after a non-jury trial, of harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26 [1]) and attempted assault in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.00 [1]).

Defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 491-492 [2008]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt of both offenses beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we accord great deference to the factfinder's opportunity at the trial to view the witnesses, hear their testimony, observe their demeanor and assess their credibility (see People v Lane, 7 NY3d 888 [2006]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Pesce, P.J., Golia and Steinhardt, JJ., concur.

Decision Date: March 16, 2011

20110316

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.