Opinion
571262/02.
Decided February 22, 2006.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court, New York County (Robert M. Stolz, J.), rendered October 18, 2002, after a jury trial, convicting her of aggravated harassment in the second degree and falsely reporting an incident in the third degree, and imposing sentence.
Judgment of conviction (Robert M. Stolz, J.), rendered October 18, 2002, affirmed.
PRESENT: McCOOE, J.P., DAVIS, GANGEL-JACOB, JJ.
Defendant was convicted of aggravated harassment in the second degree and falsely reporting an incident in the third degree after she anonymously called the police and reported an incident involving her ex-boyfriend. The verdict on the falsely reporting an incident charge was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Evidence at trial showed that on March 23, 2001, the police received an anonymous 911 telephone call. The caller reported that the night before she had been in the complainant's apartment, where there were drugs and guns. The caller indicated to the police that the complainant was acting irrationally and that "there could possibly be some violence." Based on the substance of the anonymous statements, the police concluded that an emergency existed and obtained a "no-knock" search warrant for the apartment, which turned out to be vacant. A search of the complainant's current apartment (which was next door to the apartment where the incident was said to have occurred) resulted in the recovery of several handguns.
The police ascertained that defendant was the complainant's ex-girlfriend, the complainant was out of town on the date of the alleged incident, and defendant had not been in the complainant's apartment for approximately one year. The telephone company records revealed that the telephone call, which lasted over eight minutes, was placed from defendant's apartment. Based upon this evidence, the jury rationally could have concluded that defendant was the anonymous caller who gratuitously reported an incident which in fact did not occur (Penal Law § 240[3]). It being undisputed that no incident occurred at the reported place and time, the recovery of weapons at a location other than the one specified by defendant did not undermine the sufficiency of the People's proof. Nor is it a defense that defendant, based on observations allegedly made one year before the reported incident, may have suspected that the complainant was in possession of guns.
The evidence established that defendant had not been in the complainant's apartment for a year, and that her false anonymous statements to the police that the incident had taken place the night before and the substance of her communication led the police to conclude that an emergency existed, and to act accordingly. Rather than acting as a "good citizen," defendant fabricated the incident to harass her ex-boyfriend.
We have considered defendant's remaining claims, including her constitutional challenges to the aggravated harassment statute (Penal Law 240.30), and find them unavailing.
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.