From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ortiz

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 23, 2012
99 A.D.3d 596 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-10-23

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent. v. John ORTIZ, Defendant–Appellant.

Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Paul Wiener of counsel), for appellant. Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Orrie A. Levy of counsel), for respondent.


Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Paul Wiener of counsel), for appellant. Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Orrie A. Levy of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Michael A. Gross, J.), rendered May 4, 2009, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of attempted criminal contempt in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of one year's probation, unanimously reversed, on the facts, the conviction vacated, and the indictment dismissed.

The verdict was against the weight of the evidence. “[A]n acquittal would not have been unreasonable” as there was conflicting testimony and a lack of evidence establishing defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ( see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348–349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007];People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672 [1987] ). The victim claimed that, while she was in the hospital, defendant made a threatening phone call to her, in violation of an order of protection. However, she could not identify the time defendant made the call or whether she received the call on her cell phone or on the phone in her hospital room. There was also no documentary proof establishing that defendant made the call.

Moreover, the victim's testimony was inconsistent with defendant's documented conduct during the months leading up to the incident. Notably, defendant and the victim were going through a bitter divorce. However, defendant's conduct in connection with the divorce demonstrated his intent to act lawfully, contrary to the victim's testimony.

While we afford great deference to the court's opportunity to hear testimony and observe demeanor, our review of the record finds the victim's testimony incredible.

ANDRIAS, J.P., SWEENY, CATTERSON, MOSKOWITZ, MANZANET–DANIELS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Ortiz

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 23, 2012
99 A.D.3d 596 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

People v. Ortiz

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent. v. John ORTIZ…

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

Date published: Oct 23, 2012

Citations

99 A.D.3d 596 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 7059
952 N.Y.S.2d 443

Citing Cases

People v. Whatts

Witnesses observed the arresting officer throw defendant to the ground, drag her to the curb and stomp on her…