People v Caballero (Miguel)

[*1] People v Caballero (Miguel) 2016 NY Slip Op 51550(U) Decided on October 25, 2016 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 25, 2016
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Lowe, III, J.P., Schoenfeld, Ling-Cohan, JJ.
570546/14

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Miguel Caballero, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (John H. Wilson, J.), rendered May 21, 2014, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of menacing in the third degree and harassment in the second degree, and imposing sentence.

Per curiam.

Judgment of conviction (John H. Wilson, J.), rendered May 21, 2014, affirmed.

The verdict convicting defendant of menacing in the third degree and harassment in the second degree was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the court's determinations concerning credibility. The court, as factfinder, reasonably could conclude that when defendant - who was angry at complainants because of an immediately preceding incident at defendant's apartment - followed complainants to a subway station, repeatedly punched complainant Clinton Murray in the face and threatened him with further harm, he did so with intent to place Clinton in fear of "imminent serious physical injury or physical injury" (Penal Law § 120.15; Matter of Denzel F., 44 AD3d 389, 390 [2007]) and to "harass, annoy or alarm" him (Penal Law 240.26[1]; see People v Correa, 75 AD3d 478, 479 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 892 [2010]). Although there were certain inconsistencies between complainants' testimony and the police report, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily issues to be determined by the factfinder, which saw and heard the witnesses (see People v David W., 156 AD2d 605, 606 [1989], lv denied 76 NY2d 744 [1990]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: October 25, 2016