Opinion
2011-10-11
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,v.Juan PEREZ, appellant.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Jonathan M. Kratter of counsel), for appellant.Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Lori Glachman, and Matthew Livits of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Konviser, J.), rendered January 23, 2009, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (four counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the convictions of robbery in the second degree is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Hawkins, 11 N.Y.3d 484, 491–492, 872 N.Y.S.2d 395, 900 N.E.2d 946). In any event, viewing the *896 evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ( see People v. Gonzalez, 3 A.D.3d 579, 770 N.Y.S.2d 661). Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence ( see CPLR 470.15[5]; People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1), we nevertheless accord great deference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor ( see People v. Mateo, 2 N.Y.3d 383, 410, 779 N.Y.S.2d 399, 811 N.E.2d 1053, cert. denied 542 U.S. 946, 124 S.Ct. 2929, 159 L.Ed.2d 828; People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilty was not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v. Romero, 7 N.Y.3d 633, 826 N.Y.S.2d 163, 859 N.E.2d 902).
ANGIOLILLO, J.P., DICKERSON, CHAMBERS and LOTT, JJ., concur.