Court Opinion

ID: 4376468
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-03-13 19:34:32.066559+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:27:14.179655
License: Public Domain

People v Dupree (2019 NY Slip Op 01789)

People v Dupree

2019 NY Slip Op 01789

Decided on March 13, 2019

Appellate Division, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on March 13, 2019
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, J.P.
SHERI S. ROMAN
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY
VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.

2015-11426
 (Ind. No. 1861/11)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,
vReginald Dupree, appellant.

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY (Caitlin Halpern of counsel), for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Christopher Bae of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (John B. Latella, J.), rendered October 5, 2015, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts), leaving the scene of an incident without reporting, and falsely reporting an incident in the third degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the testimony of an accomplice was sufficiently corroborated (see CPL 60.22[1]; People v Reome, 15 NY3d 188, 192).
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), 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 NY3d 383; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). 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).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
LEVENTHAL, J.P., ROMAN, CONNOLLY and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court