Opinion
2012-10-10
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Steven ROBINSON, appellant.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Kathleen Whooley of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Ellen C. Abbot, and Jessica L. Zellner of counsel), for respondent.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Kathleen Whooley of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Ellen C. Abbot, and Jessica L. Zellner of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Latella, J.), rendered October 19, 2009, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence ( seeCPL 470.15[5]; People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348, 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,cert. denied542 U.S. 946, 124 S.Ct. 2929, 159 L.Ed.2d 828;People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672). Upon our review of the record, 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).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, his absence during the jury's viewing of exhibits that had already been admitted into evidence did not deprive him of the right to be present at all material stages of the trial ( see People v. Monroe, 90 N.Y.2d at 984, 665 N.Y.S.2d 617, 688 N.E.2d 491;People v. Valerio, 70 A.D.3d 869, 870, 894 N.Y.S.2d 157).
The record, viewed in totality, demonstrates that the defendant was afforded the effective assistance of counsel ( see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584;People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the prosecutor's summation remarks, when viewed in light of the defense summation, did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial ( see People v. Fortune, 70 A.D.3d 964, 893 N.Y.S.2d 880;People v. Barnes, 33 A.D.3d 811, 812, 826 N.Y.S.2d 283;People v. Farrell, 228 A.D.2d 693, 694, 646 N.Y.S.2d 124).
The defendant's remaining contentions, raised in his pro se supplemental brief, are without merit.