Court Opinion

ID: 9891914
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-19 19:09:25.520179+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.766969
License: Public Domain

People v Serraty (2023 NY Slip Op 51107(U))

[*1]

People v Serraty (Andres)

2023 NY Slip Op 51107(U)

Decided on October 18, 2023

Appellate Term, First Department

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

This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on October 18, 2023
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT

PRESENT: Brigantti, J.P., Tisch, Michael, JJ.

570329/17

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
againstAndres Serraty, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Harold Adler, J.), rendered March 31, 2017, convicting him, after a nonjury trial, of attempted assault in the third degree and attempted criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and imposing sentence.
Per Curiam.
Judgment of conviction (Harold Adler, J.), rendered March 31, 2017, affirmed.
The verdict convicting defendant of attempted assault in the third degree (see Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.00[1]) and attempted criminal mischief in the fourth degree (see Penal Law §§ 110.00, 145.00[1]) was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations, as the victim's account of the domestic dispute was neither unreliable nor inconsistent, and was supported by photographs of her injuries. The victim testified that when defendant informed her that he would stop paying child support, she began to record their conversation with her Iphone. When defendant saw that he was being recorded, he pushed the victim to the wall and twice pushed her to the floor, causing bruises on her arms and legs, and slammed her Iphone to the ground, causing the screen to break. Defendant's claim that there was insufficient proof of his intent is unavailing, since his intent to cause physical injury to the victim and to damage her property was fairly inferred from his actions (see People v Gordon, 23 NY3d 643, 650 [2014]).  
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur I concur I concurDecision Date: October 18, 2023