Opinion
2013-10-4
Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (John J. Connell, J.), rendered May 8, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts). Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (David R. Juergens of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Amanda Dreher of Counsel), for Respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (John J. Connell, J.), rendered May 8, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts).
Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (David R. Juergens of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Amanda Dreher of Counsel), for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3] ) and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (§ 265.02[1], [3] ). Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crimes as charged to the jury ( see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1), and affording deference to the jury's credibility determinations ( see People v. Wedlington, 67 A.D.3d 1472, 1473, 889 N.Y.S.2d 355,lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 807, 899 N.Y.S.2d 141, 925 N.E.2d 945), we reject defendant's contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence ( see generally *924People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672). “Although there was conflicting testimony and thus ‘an acquittal would not have been unreasonable’ ” ( People v. Burroughs, 57 A.D.3d 1459, 1460, 869 N.Y.S.2d 827,lv. denied 12 N.Y.3d 756, 876 N.Y.S.2d 708, 904 N.E.2d 845, quoting Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d at 348, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1), the verdict is supported by the weight of the credible evidence, i.e., the testimony of the evidence technician, security guard, and two police officers that defendant was found shortly after the shooting, albeit unconscious from a gunshot wound to the head, with a fully loaded defaced pistol on his lap.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.