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. William Thomas

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts Appellate Term, First Department


July 15, 2011

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
RESPONDENT,
v.
WILLIAM THOMAS,
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Alfred Cooper, J.H.O.), rendered January 15, 2009, after a non-jury trial, convicting him of two counts of disorderly conduct, and imposing sentence.

Per curiam.

People v Thomas (William)

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on July 15, 2011

APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT, FIRST DEPARTMENT

PRESENT: Shulman, J.P., Schoenfeld, Torres, JJ

Judgment of conviction (Alfred Cooper, J.H.O), rendered January 15, 2009, affirmed.Defendant's challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction of disorderly conduct (see Penal Law § 240.20[3],[7]) is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we also reject it on the merits. We further find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). The trial court, as factfinder, was warranted in concluding that defendant's conduct -- including his actions in riding his bicycle the wrong way against rush-hour traffic, "throwing" the bicycle down so that it came to rest in a traffic lane, and yelling and cursing at the arresting officer -- recklessly created a substantial risk of "a potential or immediate public problem" (People v Weaver, 16 NY3d 123, 128 [2011], quoting People v Munafo, 50 NY2d 326, 331 [1980]).

We have considered defendant's remaining arguments, including his challenge to the facial sufficiency of the underlying accusatory instruments, and find them lacking in merit.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Decision Date: July 15, 2011

20110715

© 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.