People v. Benjamin

Full title: The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Herburtho Benjamin…

Court: SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Jan 28, 2015

2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 779 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

2009-07522

01-28-2015

The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Herburtho Benjamin, appellant.

James Layton Koenig, New York, N.Y., for appellant. Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Thomas M. Ross of counsel), for respondent.

RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P.

JEFFREY A. COHEN

COLLEEN D. DUFFY

HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ. (Ind. No. 3707/08)

James Layton Koenig, New York, N.Y., for appellant.

Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Thomas M. Ross of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Firetog, J.), rendered July 16, 2009, convicting him of manslaughter in the second degree, attempted assault in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's assertion, his contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction of manslaughter in the second degree, under a theory of mutual combat, is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 492-493; People v Finger, 95 NY2d 894, 895). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), 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 NY3d 342), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). 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 NY3d 633).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

BALKIN, J.P., COHEN, DUFFY and LASALLE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court