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. Vincent O'hanlon

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


August 1, 2011

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
RESPONDENT,
v.
VINCENT O'HANLON,
APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Town of Putnam Valley, Putnam County (Gina C. Capone, J.), rendered December 15, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, after a non-jury trial, of building without a permit.

People v O'Hanlon (Vincent)

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on August 1, 2011

PRESENT: NICOLAI, P.J., TANENBAUM and LaCAVA, JJ

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Defendant was convicted, after a non-jury trial, of building without a permit (Code of the Town of Putnam Valley § 165-80). Defendant's contention that the evidence at trial was legally insufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is not preserved 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 beyond a reasonable doubt defendant's guilt of building without a permit. 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 to view the witnesses, hear their testimony, observe their demeanor and assess their credibility (see People v Lane, 7 NY3d 888, 890 [2006]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon a review of the record, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

Defendant's remaining contentions are either without merit or are unpreserved for appellate review.

Nicolai, P.J., Tanenbaum and LaCava, JJ., concur.

Decision Date:August 01, 2011

20110801

© 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.