Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Evangalisto Perez, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2012-01-31
Citations: 91 A.D.3d 970
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Evangalisto Perez, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 91
Pages: 970–970

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Evangalisto Perez, Appellant.
[937 NYS2d 615]

Opinion:
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 establish the defendant's guilt 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 [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, 410 [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 was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).
Defense counsel provided meaningful representation under both the state and federal constitutional standards (see Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]; People v Caban, 5 NY3d 143, 156 [2005]; People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708 [1998]; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137 [1981]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Rivera, J.E, Eng, Lott and Sgroi, JJ, concur.