SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE TERM: 2nd, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
May 20, 2011
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
Appeal from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Geraldine Pickett, J.), rendered June 23, 2009.
People v Paige (Angela)
Decided on May 20, 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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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., WESTON and GOLIA, JJ
The judgment convicted defendant, after a non-jury trial, of attempted assault in the third degree, menacing in the third degree and harassment in the second degree.
ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Defendant was convicted of attempted assault in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.00 ), menacing in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.15) and harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26 ). To the extent that she now contends that the evidence of guilt was legally insufficient with respect to all three charges, her claims are not preserved (see People v Carncross, 14 NY3d 319, 324-325 ). In any event, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People (see People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 493 ), we find that it was legally sufficient to sustain defendant's conviction of all three offenses. In conducting our independent weight of the evidence review (see CPL 470.15 ), we assess the evidence in this non-jury trial in light of the elements of the offenses (see generally People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 ), and accord great deference to the Criminal Court's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear their testimony, and observe their demeanor (see People v Lane, 7 NY3d 888, 890 ; People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 644-645 ; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 ; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 ). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the credible evidence with respect to any of the charges.
Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Pesce, P.J., Weston and Golia, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: May 20, 2011
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.