Opinion
2018-04798 Ind. No. 1316/16
11-18-2020
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Jahmel C. WILLIAMS, Appellant.
David A. Bart, Fresh Meadows, NY, for appellant. Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (Johnnette Traill, Ellen C. Abbot, and Jessica Coalter of counsel), for respondent.
David A. Bart, Fresh Meadows, NY, for appellant.
Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (Johnnette Traill, Ellen C. Abbot, and Jessica Coalter of counsel), for respondent.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, HECTOR D. LASALLE, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Stephen A. Knopf, J.), rendered April 11, 2018, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant was convicted of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree. The trial evidence showed, inter alia, that the car the defendant was driving was stopped by the police and an open laundry bag containing several containers of over-the-counter medication stolen minutes earlier from a nearby pharmacy was recovered between the legs of a co-defendant seated in the front passenger seat.
Viewing the 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. Moreover, upon our independent review of the record (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. Romero, 7 N.Y.3d 633, 826 N.Y.S.2d 163, 859 N.E.2d 902 ).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit (see People v. Correa, 73 A.D.3d 942, 943, 900 N.Y.S.2d 446 ).
CHAMBERS, J.P., COHEN, LASALLE and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.