Opinion
No. 2012–1344WCR.
09-18-2015
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Oscar LINARES, Appellant.
Opinion
Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Yonkers, Westchester County (Thomas R. Daly, J.), rendered June 1, 2012. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree.
ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Defendant was charged in a misdemeanor information with unlawful assembly (Penal Law § 240.10), obstructing governmental administration in the second degree (Penal Law § 195.05), and resisting arrest (Penal Law § 205.30). Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620 1983 ), we find that there is a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences from which a rational trier of fact could have determined that defendant's guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 2007 ). The trial testimony demonstrated that defendant had prevented a police officer from performing an official function, i.e., effectuating a lawful arrest of a third person, by means of physical interference (see Penal Law § 195.05; cf. People v. Lupinacci, 191 A.D.2d 589 1993 ). Thus, contrary to defendant's contention, the evidence was legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree.
In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.155; Danielson, 9 NY3d 342), we accord great deference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear their testimony, and observe their demeanor (see People v. Lane, 7 NY3d 888, 890 2006; People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495 1987 ). Upon a review of the record, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Romero, 7 NY3d 633 2006 ).
Defendant's remaining contention pertaining to the City Court's instructions to the jury is not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.052; People v. Robinson, 88 N.Y.2d 1001, 1001–1002 1996; People v. Smith, 276 A.D.2d 810 2000; People v. Cahill, 220 A.D.2d 608 1995 ). In any event, defendant's argument lacks merit since, when viewed as a whole, the court's charge was proper (see People v. Henderson, 259 A.D.2d 495 1999; People v. Custodio, 243 A.D.2d 576 1997; Cahill, 220 A.D.2d 608).
Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
TOLBERT, J.P., GARGUILO and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.