Opinion
818 KA 18-01993
11-19-2021
AMDURSKY, PELKY, FENNELL & WALLEN, P.C., OSWEGO (COURTNEY S. RADICK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. GREGORY S. OAKES, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, OSWEGO (AMY L. HALLENBECK OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
AMDURSKY, PELKY, FENNELL & WALLEN, P.C., OSWEGO (COURTNEY S. RADICK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
GREGORY S. OAKES, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, OSWEGO (AMY L. HALLENBECK OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND WINSLOW, 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 jury verdict of, inter alia, criminal sexual act in the first degree ( Penal Law § 130.50 [2] ). We affirm.
Weight of the evidence review "involves a ‘two-step approach’ wherein a [reviewing] court must (1) ‘determine whether, based on all the credible evidence, an acquittal would not have been unreasonable’; and[, if yes,] (2) ‘weigh the relative probative force of conflicting testimony and the relative strength of conflicting inferences that may be drawn from the testimony’ " ( People v. Sanchez , 32 N.Y.3d 1021, 1023, 87 N.Y.S.3d 135, 112 N.E.3d 312 [2018] ; see People v. Delamota , 18 N.Y.3d 107, 116-117, 936 N.Y.S.2d 614, 960 N.E.2d 383 [2011] ). We thus reject defendant's contention that a guilty verdict is automatically against the weight of the evidence whenever an acquittal would not have been unreasonable (see People v. Danielson , 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348-349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ; 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 ineffective assistance of counsel claim (see People v. Tetro , 181 A.D.3d 1286, 1288, 119 N.Y.S.3d 788 [4th Dept. 2020], lv denied 35 N.Y.3d 1070, 129 N.Y.S.3d 388, 152 N.E.3d 1189 [2020] ; People v. Vincenty , 138 A.D.3d 428, 428-429, 28 N.Y.S.3d 686 [1st Dept. 2016], lv denied 27 N.Y.3d 1156, 39 N.Y.S.3d 390, 62 N.E.3d 130 [2016] ; People v. Martinez , 35 A.D.3d 156, 157, 825 N.Y.S.2d 200 [1st Dept. 2006], lv denied 8 N.Y.3d 924, 834 N.Y.S.2d 515, 866 N.E.2d 461 [2007] ). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved.