People v. Spleen

159 A.D.3d 838

69 N.Y.S.3d 819 (Mem)

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,

v.Jamille SPLEEN, appellant.

2015–03627

Ind.No. 2998/12

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

Submitted—November 17, 2017

March 14, 2018

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Joshua M. Levine of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, Nancy Fitzpatrick Talcott, and Ayelet Sela of counsel), for respondent.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Daniel Lewis, J.), rendered March 25, 2015, convicting him of grand larceny in the fourth degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his identity as the perpetrator is unpreserved for appellate review, as he did not specify this ground in support of his motion to dismiss at trial (see CPL 470.05[2] ; People v. Hawkins, 11 N.Y.3d 484, 492, 872 N.Y.S.2d 395, 900 N.E.2d 946 ; People v. Hankerson, 149 A.D.3d 778, 51 N.Y.S.3d 169 ). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932 ), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish his identity as the perpetrator beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v. Lewis, 150 A.D.3d 1264, 57 N.Y.S.3d 62 ; People v. Thomas, 146 A.D.3d 991, 992, 46 N.Y.S.3d 130 ). 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, 348–349, 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 ; People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672 ). 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 ).

MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, DUFFY and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.