Opinion
2018–09706 Ind.No. 1796/17
09-02-2020
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Henry OLIVER, Appellant.
Michael A. Ciaffa, Uniondale, NY, for appellant. Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Kevin C. King and Michael J. Balch of counsel), for respondent.
Michael A. Ciaffa, Uniondale, NY, for appellant.
Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Kevin C. King and Michael J. Balch of counsel), for respondent.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P., SHERI S. ROMAN, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant was convicted of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree, and petit larceny, after a jury trial, based upon evidence that on May 8, 2017, he stole merchandise from a JCPenney and a Modell's Sporting Goods.
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 the defendant's guilt of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree beyond a reasonable doubt. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the evidence was sufficient to establish that the value of the merchandise stolen from JCPenney exceeded $1,000 and that the aggregate value of the merchandise stolen from both stores exceeded $3,000 (see Penal Law §§ 155.20[1] ; 155.30[1]; 165.50; People v. Dickerson, 168 A.D.3d 971, 971–972, 91 N.Y.S.3d 484 ; People v. Tyler, 140 A.D.3d 1617, 1619, 32 N.Y.S.3d 764 ). 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 jury'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 on those counts 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 ).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).
CHAMBERS, J.P., ROMAN, CHRISTOPHER and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.