From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 11, 2011
80 A.D.3d 623 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

No. 2008-03670.

January 11, 2011.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerges, J.), rendered April 6, 2008, convicting him of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree, sodomy in the second degree, criminal sexual act in the second degree (11 counts), rape in the second degree, and endangering the welfare of a child, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (William Kastin of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Anthea H. Bruffee, and Terry-Ann Llewellyn of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Covello, J.P., Eng, Chambers and Hall, JJ.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349), 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; 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, cert denied 542 US 946; 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, 643).

The defendant's contention that 13 of the counts of the indictment were rendered duplicitous by trial testimony is not preserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v Drysdale, 295 AD2d 533), and we decline to reach the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction ( see CPL 470.15; People v Nash, 77 AD3d 687, 688; People v Saintilus, 74 AD3d 996, 997).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 11, 2011
80 A.D.3d 623 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

People v. Davis

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KEVIN DAVIS, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 11, 2011

Citations

80 A.D.3d 623 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 236
914 N.Y.S.2d 667

Citing Cases

People v. Syville

An accusatory instrument that is not facially duplicative may be rendered duplicative by testimony (e.g.…

People v. DeShields

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (seePeople v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621,…