People v Young Chen

[*1] People v Young Chen 2007 NY Slip Op 51872(U) [17 Misc 3d 127(A)] Decided on October 4, 2007 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 4, 2007
APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: McCooe, J.P., Schoenfeld, Heitler, JJ
570609/06.

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Young Chen, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Alexander Jeong, J.), rendered June 22, 2006, after a jury trial, convicting him of harassment in the second degree, and imposing sentence.

PER CURIAM:

Judgment of conviction (Alexander Jeong, J.), rendered June 22, 2006, affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence.
The jury reasonably could have found that defendant was the initial aggressor and rejected the defendant's implausible testimony that the substantial facial bruises sustained by the complainant were the result of his falling onto a couch. The complainant's delay in reporting the crime merely presented the jury with a credibility issue that it appropriately resolved.

The court properly exercised its discretion in admitting brief rebuttal testimony that tended to refute defendant's version of events (see People v Harris, 57 NY2d 335, 345 [1982], cert denied 460 US 1047 [1983]; People v McNair, 26 AD3d 245, 246-247 [2006], lv denied 6 NY3d 896 [2006]).

Defendant's challenges to the prosecutor's summation are largely unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find no basis for reversal. The challenged remarks constituted fair comment on the evidence, were responsive to defense arguments, and did not shift the burden of proof or otherwise deprive defendant of a fair trial (see People v Overlee, 236 AD2d 133, 136 [1997], lv denied 91 NY2d 976 [1998]; People v D'Alessandro, 184 AD2d 114 [1992], lv denied 81 NY2d 884 [1993]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT. [*2]
Decision Date: October 4, 2007