From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Kim

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 28, 2003
2003 N.Y. Slip Op. 51536 (N.Y. App. Term 2003)

Opinion

2002-595 Q CR.

Decided October 28, 2003.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Criminal Court, Queens County (S. Knopf, J.), rendered March 22, 2002, convicting defendant, after trial, of attempted assault in the third degree, attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree and harassment in the second degree, and imposing sentence.

Judgment of conviction unanimously affirmed.

PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., PATTERSON and RIOS, JJ.


Defendant's motions at the close of the People's case and at the conclusion of trial addressed purported contradictions in evidence and the inherent implausibility of certain aspects of the complainant's testimony only in terms of the weight rather than the legal sufficiency of the evidence (CPL 470.15 f5]; People v. Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Deferring as we must to the finder of fact, who saw and heard the witnesses ( People v. Hernandez, 288 AD2d 489, 490), and weighing "the relative probative force of conflicting inferences that may be drawn from the testimony" ( People v. Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 495), we cannot conclude that complainant's testimony was so inherently implausible or so marred by material inconsistencies as to render the verdicts against the weight of the evidence ( People v. Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Although certain aspects of complainant's account of the incident, essentially. that defendant, enraged at the allegedly disrespectful conduct of complainant in the restaurant where defendant was employed, "came at" complainant from behind and swung a coffee mug at complainant's head, striking him below the eye and inflicting an injury, appear implausible or contradicted by other evidence, those matters were tangential to the material issues ( People v. Butler, 221 AD2d 458, 459), and did not render complainant's account so unworthy of belief that it failed to support the verdicts ( People v. Toro, 272 AD2d 351; People v. Walker, 215 AD2d 607; cf. People v. Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). We have considered defendant's remaining claim and find it without merit ( People v. Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424, 427; People v. Paylor, 121 AD2d 891, 893, affd 70 NY2d 146).


Summaries of

People v. Kim

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 28, 2003
2003 N.Y. Slip Op. 51536 (N.Y. App. Term 2003)
Case details for

People v. Kim

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CHEOL KIM, Appellant

Court:Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 28, 2003

Citations

2003 N.Y. Slip Op. 51536 (N.Y. App. Term 2003)