From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Guerman

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Dec 21, 2017
156 A.D.3d 544 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

5263 Ind. 2976/14

12-21-2017

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ioulia GUERMAN, Defendant–Appellant.

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Anokhi Shah of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Meghan C. O'Brien of counsel), for respondent.


Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Anokhi Shah of counsel), for appellant.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Meghan C. O'Brien of counsel), for respondent.

Tom, J.P., Friedman, Renwick, Kahn, Kern, JJ.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael R. Sonberg, J.), rendered July 29, 2015, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of burglary in the third degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, petit larceny and possession of burglar's tools, and sentencing her to an aggregate term of five years' probation, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict 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 [2007] ). There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations, including its evaluation of a store employee's testimony that he had communicated a trespass notice barring defendant from the store after a prior shoplifting incident.We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.


Summaries of

People v. Guerman

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Dec 21, 2017
156 A.D.3d 544 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

People v. Guerman

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ioulia GUERMAN…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 21, 2017

Citations

156 A.D.3d 544 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 8891
65 N.Y.S.3d 687

Citing Cases

People v. Goodson

The record supports the conclusion that defendant knew he was prohibited from entering a store as the result…

People v. Goodson

The record supports the conclusion that defendant knew he was prohibited from entering a store as the result…