Opinion
10-06-2022
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Alphonso Lewis, Defendant-Appellant.
Unpublished Opinion
PRESENT: Brigantti, J.P., Tisch, Michael, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Kate Paek, J.), rendered December 14, 2017, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of attempted endangering the welfare of a child and harassment in the second degree, and imposing sentence.
Judgment of conviction (Kate Paek, J.), rendered December 14, 2017, affirmed.
Defendant's challenges to the legal sufficiency of the evidence with respect to particular elements of the charged offenses are unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Hawkins, 11 N.Y.3d 484, 492 [2008]), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt of attempted endangering the welfare of a child (see Penal Law §§ 110.00, 260.10[1]) and harassment in the second degree (see Penal Law § 240.26[1]) beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial court, as fact finder, could reasonably conclude that defendant school monitor - who grabbed the arm of the child victim (who was simply speaking to his classmates when he was not supposed to), then forcefully held the child's arm with a hard, sustained grip while pulling him to the back of the line, causing multiple bruises - was aware that his conduct could likely result in harm to a child (see People v Zeifman, 11 A.D.3d 288 [2004]; People v Vasquez, 75 Misc.3d 132 [A], 2022 NY Slip Op 50451[U][App Term, 2nd Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2022]) and acted with the intent to harass, annoy and alarm (see People v Correa, 75 A.D.3d 478, 479 [2010], lv denied 15 N.Y.3d 892 [2010]; People v Jackson, 66 Misc.3d 132 [A], 2019 NY Slip Op 52081[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2019]).
Nor was the verdict against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis upon which to disturb the trial court's
determinations concerning credibility.
All concur