Court Opinion

ID: 5118097
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-10-13 19:08:50.490732+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:22:05.530992
License: Public Domain

People v Sandoval-Campos (2021 NY Slip Op 05596)

People v Sandoval-Campos

2021 NY Slip Op 05596

Decided on October 13, 2021

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 October 13, 2021
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P.
BETSY BARROS
PAUL WOOTEN
DEBORAH A. DOWLING, JJ.

2018-13469
 (Ind. No. 16-01143)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,
vRonal Danilo Sandoval-Campos, appellant.

Jason M. Bernheimer, Valhalla, NY, for appellant.
Miriam E. Rocah, District Attorney, White Plains, NY (Raffaelina Gianfrancesco and Christine DiSalvo of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Susan Cacace, J.), rendered September 18, 2018, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, burglary in the second degree as a sexually motivated felony, attempted rape in the first degree (two counts), attempted rape in the third degree (two counts), and sexual abuse in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that there was legally insufficient evidence to support the convictions is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the convictions. 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 jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410; 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 defendant was provided with the effective assistance of counsel (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137).
CHAMBERS, J.P., BARROS, WOOTEN and DOWLING, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Maria T. Fasulo
Acting Clerk of the Court