Opinion
10-19-2016
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Rogelio THOMAS, appellant.
Patrick Michael Megaro, Bay Shore, NY, for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, Joseph N. Ferdenzi, and Jonathan K. Yi of counsel), for respondent.
Patrick Michael Megaro, Bay Shore, NY, for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, Joseph N. Ferdenzi, and Jonathan K. Yi of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Braun, J.) rendered July 24, 2014, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
“Upon [a] defendant's request, the Appellate Division must conduct a weight of the evidence review” and, thus, “a defendant will be given one appellate review of adverse factual findings” (People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 ). In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 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 jury'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 ; 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 guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Gordon, 132 A.D.3d 904, 18 N.Y.S.3d 121 ; People v. Perez, 120 A.D.3d 514, 515, 990 N.Y.S.2d 590 ; People v. Washington, 108 A.D.3d 578, 580, 970 N.Y.S.2d 36 ; People v. Vasquez, 94 A.D.3d 915, 916, 941 N.Y.S.2d 853 ).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel under the New York State Constitution since, viewing defense counsel's performance in totality, counsel provided meaningful representation (see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584 ; People v. Williams, 136 A.D.3d 686, 23 N.Y.S.3d 911 ; People v. Myers, 117 A.D.3d 755, 756, 984 N.Y.S.2d 616 ; People v. McNeal, 111 A.D.3d 652, 653, 974 N.Y.S.2d 276 ; People v. Campbell, 54 A.D.3d 959, 863 N.Y.S.2d 827 ; People v. Hyatt, 2 A.D.3d 749, 750, 768 N.Y.S.2d 651 ). Further, the defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel under the United States Constitution (see Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 ).
DILLON, J.P., ROMAN, HINDS-RADIX and DUFFY, JJ., concur.