Opinion
840 KA 22-00118
11-17-2023
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Keion M. PIERRE, Defendant-Appellant.
DAVID J. PAJAK, ALDEN, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. LORI PETTIT RIEMAN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LITTLE VALLEY, FOR RESPONDENT.
DAVID J. PAJAK, ALDEN, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
LORI PETTIT RIEMAN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LITTLE VALLEY, FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., LINDLEY, MONTOUR, GREENWOOD, AND NOWAK, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a nonjury verdict of arson in the second degree ( Penal Law § 150.15 ). Defendant contends that the evidence is legally insufficient to establish his identity as the person who intentionally set the fire, that he intended to damage the building by setting the fire, and that the building was in fact damaged as a result. Even assuming, arguendo, that defendant's contention is fully preserved for our review, we reject that contention. Further, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime in this nonjury trial (see People v. Danielson , 9 N.Y.3d 342, 349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ), we conclude that, even if a different verdict would not have been unreasonable, it cannot be said that County Court failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded (see generally People v. Bleakley , 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672 [1987] ). We also reject defendant's contention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. "There is nothing in the record to indicate that defendant was deprived of meaningful representation" at any stage of the proceedings ( People v. Eckerd , 161 A.D.3d 1508, 1509, 76 N.Y.S.3d 710 [4th Dept. 2018], lv denied 31 N.Y.3d 1116, 81 N.Y.S.3d 376, 106 N.E.3d 759 [2018] ). " ‘If defendant can demonstrate facts, not recited in the record, that would raise [a colorable] issue [of ineffective assistance], that issue can be pursued by motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 ’ " ( People v. Barbuto , 126 A.D.3d 1501, 1504, 6 N.Y.S.3d 369 [4th Dept. 2015], lv denied 25 N.Y.3d 1159, 15 N.Y.S.3d 291, 36 N.E.3d 94 [2015] ). Contrary to defendant's further contention, the sentence in not unduly harsh or severe. We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions and conclude that none warrants reversal or modification of the judgment.