From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Vaquero

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jun 12, 2013
107 A.D.3d 830 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-06-12

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Anival VAQUERO, appellant.

Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Frances A. Gallagher of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Ellen C. Abbot, and Daniel Alan Spitzer of counsel), for respondent.


Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Frances A. Gallagher of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Ellen C. Abbot, and Daniel Alan Spitzer of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Knopf, J.), rendered July 20, 2009, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction of robbery in the second degree under Penal Law § 160.10(1) is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05 [2] ). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the defendant's guilt of robbery in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, 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 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. denied542 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, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt as to that crime 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).

BALKIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, SGROI and MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Vaquero

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jun 12, 2013
107 A.D.3d 830 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

People v. Vaquero

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Anival VAQUERO, appellant.

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

Date published: Jun 12, 2013

Citations

107 A.D.3d 830 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
966 N.Y.S.2d 692
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 4363