Opinion
2002-397 Q CR.
Decided October 28, 2003.
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Criminal Court, Queens County (D. Butler, J.), rendered on March 13, 2002, convicting him of attempted criminal contempt in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 215.50) and harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26), and imposing sentence.
Judgment of conviction unanimously modified on the law by reversing the conviction of harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26) and dismissing the count of the accusatory instrument charging same; as so modified, affirmed.
PRESENT: ARONIN, J.P., PATTERSON and GOLIA, JJ.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( People v. Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find it legally insufficient to establish defendant's guilt of harassment in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt ( see People v. Dietze, 75 NY2d 47, 53-54; People v. Todaro, 26 NY2d 325). Applying the same standard to the attempted criminal contempt in the second degree conviction, however, we find that the People have satisfied their burden of proof. Moreover, contrary to defendant's contention, the verdict of guilt for the latter conviction was not against the weight of the evidence. The resolution of credibility issues by the trier of fact and its determination of the weight to be accorded the evidence are entitled to great deference on appeal and should not be disturbed unless unsupported by the record ( People v. Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). While the defendant presented an alibi, the trier of fact was not bound to accept it and, upon our review of the record, we cannot say that the court below failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded ( People v. Ruiz, 291 AD2d 418; People v. Terrill, 265 AD2d 587; see People v. Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495).