Opinion
106184.
12-17-2015
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Lawrence WRIGHT, Appellant.
Theodore J. Stein, Woodstock, for appellant. D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.
Theodore J. Stein, Woodstock, for appellant.
D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.
Opinion
DEVINE, J.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered August 7, 2013, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.
Defendant was charged with various offenses in the wake of gunplay at an apartment complex in the City of Kingston, Ulster County. Following a jury trial, he was convicted of the crimes of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. County Court sentenced defendant, a second felony offender, to an aggregate prison term of 10 years to be followed by postrelease supervision of five years. Defendant now appeals.
We affirm. “A person having previously been convicted of a crime is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree when he or she possesses an operable firearm, and of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree when such firearm is loaded” (People v. Perry, 116 A.D.3d 1253, 1254, 983 N.Y.S.2d 699 2014, citing Penal Law §§ 265.011; 265.02 1; 265.033 ). Defendant was arraigned on a special information alleging that he had previously been convicted of a crime. Contrary to defendant's contention, because he admitted the prior conviction, County Court appropriately “submit[ted] the case to the jury without reference thereto” (CPL 200.603[a]; see People v. Cooper, 78 N.Y.2d 476, 481–482, 577 N.Y.S.2d 202, 583 N.E.2d 915 1991 ).
Defendant next argues that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. In that regard, Venice Baird testified that his mother became uncomfortable when she noticed a green Jaguar parked outside of her apartment, and that he went outside to confront the driver and ask him to leave. Baird and a neighbor, Michelle Lind, recognized the Jaguar and defendant, the driver, from prior observations. Baird, Lind and others testified to the verbal altercation that ensued and, although defendant drove away to visit an acquaintance in a nearby apartment, Baird expected further trouble. Trouble indeed followed when defendant drove past Baird again, with an angry exchange of words, prompting Baird to throw a stick that damaged the side-view mirror of the Jaguar. Defendant, wearing a blue latex glove, was then observed to fire a pistol out of the driver's side window. Defendant fled and attempted to dispose of the evidence, but investigators located the still-loaded pistol and glove after speaking to his girlfriend. The pistol was tested and found to be operable, and a weapons examiner determined that a shell casing recovered at the crime scene had been fired from it. Investigators further recovered genetic material from the pistol's trigger that, while not conclusive, strongly suggested that defendant was one of its users. Defendant explored issues that called the credibility of the eyewitnesses into question but, “viewing the evidence in a neutral light and according appropriate deference to the jury's credibility determinations, we find that defendant's convictions were not against the weight of the evidence” (People v. Capers, 129 A.D.3d 1313, 1315, 12 N.Y.S.3d 317 2015; see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 2007; People v. Hailey, 128 A.D.3d 1415, 1416–1417, 7 N.Y.S.3d 808 2015, lv. denied 26 N.Y.3d 929, 17 N.Y.S.3d 92, 38 N.E.3d 838 2015 ).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
McCARTHY, J.P., EGAN JR. AND LYNCH, JJ., concur.