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. Sam D. Curko

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


March 8, 2012

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
RESPONDENT,
v.
SAM D. CURKO,
APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Town of Shelter Island, Suffolk County (Patricia Quigley, J.), rendered October 4, 2010.

People v Curko (Sam)

Decided on March 8, 2012

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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: NICOLAI, P.J., MOLIA and IANNACCI, JJ

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

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Defendant was charged with harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26 [3]) as the result of a confrontation with the complainant that occurred outside of the Justice Court building after the complainant had testified against defendant in an unrelated civil proceeding. After a non-jury trial, defendant was convicted of the charged offense. On appeal, defendant contends, among other things, that the People failed to present legally sufficient proof of his guilt.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the People (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]) and "indulging in all reasonable inferences in the[ir] . . . favor" (People v Ford, 66 NY2d 428, 437 [1985]), we find that the trial proof was legally sufficient to prove the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. The People proffered evidence that defendant had repeatedly threatened and shouted expletives at the complainant as he walked past the complainant to his own vehicle. Such conduct amounts to "a course of conduct" or "repeatedly commit[ted] acts" sufficient to support defendant's conviction of harassment in the second degree under Penal Law § 240.26 (3) (see People v Tralli, 88 Misc 2d 117 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 1976]). Defendant's remaining contention lacks merit.

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Nicolai, P.J., Molia and Iannacci, JJ., concur. Decision Date: March 08, 2012

20120308

© 1992-2012 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.