Opinion
2017–11195 Ind. No. 1054/16
04-05-2023
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Fernando ROMUALDO, appellant.
Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, NY (Felice B. Milani of counsel), for appellant. Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Grazia DiVincenzo and Marion Tang of counsel), for respondent.
Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, NY (Felice B. Milani of counsel), for appellant.
Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Grazia DiVincenzo and Marion Tang of counsel), for respondent.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P., LINDA CHRISTOPHER, WILLIAM G. FORD, BARRY E. WARHIT, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Barbara Kahn, J.), rendered September 27, 2017, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. By decision and order dated November 12, 2020, this Court reversed the judgment and dismissed the indictment (see People v. Romualdo, 188 A.D.3d 928, 133 N.Y.S.3d 614, revd 37 N.Y.3d 1091, 156 N.Y.S.3d 803, 178 N.E.3d 451 ). On November 18, 2021, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision and order of this Court and remitted the matter to this Court for a new weight of the evidence determination and for consideration of issues raised but not determined on the appeal to this Court (see People v. Romualdo, 37 N.Y.3d 1091, 156 N.Y.S.3d 803, 178 N.E.3d 451 ). Justices Ford and Warhit have been substituted for former Justices Roman and Cohen (see 22 NYCRR 1250.1 [b]).
ORDERED that, upon remittitur from the Court of Appeals, the judgment is affirmed.
The evidence in this case was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of murder in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v. Romualdo, 37 N.Y.3d 1091, 156 N.Y.S.3d 803, 178 N.E.3d 451 ). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power (see CPL 470.15[5] ), we find that while an acquittal would not have been unreasonable in this case (see People v. Tavarez, 155 A.D.3d 783, 64 N.Y.S.3d 260 ), the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348–349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 ; People v. Romero, 7 N.Y.3d 633, 826 N.Y.S.2d 163, 859 N.E.2d 902 ; 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 ).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
CHAMBERS, J.P., CHRISTOPHER, FORD and WARHIT, JJ., concur.