Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Desiree Miranda, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2012-07-11
Citations: 97 A.D.3d 698
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Desiree Miranda, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 97
Pages: 698–699

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Desiree Miranda, Appellant.
[947 NYS2d 896]

Opinion:
There is no merit to the defendant's contention that her conviction of reckless endangerment in the first degree (see Penal Law § 120.25) is not supported by legally or factually sufficient evidence. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to prove the defendant's guilt of reckless endangerment in the first 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 NY3d 342, 348 [2007]), 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 NY3d 383 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt as to reckless endangerment in the first degree was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80, 85-86 [1982]). Rivera, J.P., Florio, Eng and Roman, JJ., concur.