People v. Smith

204 A.D.3d 704

163 N.Y.S.3d 853 (Mem)

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,

v.Rajpert SMITH, appellant.

2020–07417

Ind. No. 43/19

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Submitted—January 7, 2022

April 6, 2022

Jonathan Rosenberg, PLLC, Brooklyn, NY, for appellant.

Anne T. Donnelly, District Attorney, Mineola, NY (Judith R. Sternberg and Madeline Collins of counsel), for respondent.

BETSY BARROS, J.P., REINALDO E. RIVERA, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, WILLIAM G. FORD, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Christopher G. Quinn, J.), rendered September 22, 2020, convicting him of endangering the welfare of a child and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932 ), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt 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 N.Y.3d 342, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 ), we nevertheless accord great deference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v. Mateo, 2 N.Y.3d 383, 410, 779 N.Y.S.2d 399, 811 N.E.2d 1053 ). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Romero, 7 N.Y.3d 633, 826 N.Y.S.2d 163, 859 N.E.2d 902 ). Any conflict in the testimony of the witnesses at trial as to whether the defendant struck his son with a belt created a credibility issue, and the County Court's resolution of that issue is supported by the record (see People v. Hughes, 199 A.D.3d 937, 938, 154...