Court Opinion

ID: 5830973
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 22:23:52.437822+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:43:27.385587
License: Public Domain

The defendant’s contention that the prosecution failed to disprove his justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 492 [2008]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19 [1995]; People v Acquista, 41 AD3d 491, 491-492 [2007]; People v Santos-Mispas, 38 AD3d 923 [2007]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to disprove the defendant’s justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt (see Penal Law § 35.15; *863People v Seals, 78 AD3d 742 [2010]; People v Stoney, 72 AD3d 708 [2010]).
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]). Rivera, J.P, Eng, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.