People v Kalansuriya (Gamini)

[*1] People v Kalansuriya (Gamini) 2009 NY Slip Op 52457(U) [25 Misc 3d 141(A)] Decided on December 2, 2009 Appellate Term, Second 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 December 2, 2009
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 2nd, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : GOLIA, J.P., PESCE and WESTON, JJ
2007-1603 RI CR.

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Gamini Kalansuriya, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Richmond County (Matthew A. Sciarrino, Jr., J.), rendered September 5, 2007. The judgment convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of attempted sexual abuse in the second degree and attempted endangering the welfare of a child.

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Upon a review of the record, we are of the opinion that the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), was legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt of attempted sexual abuse in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.60) and attempted endangering the welfare of a child (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 260.10). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]). It is well settled that the credibility of witnesses is a question of fact, and the resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded the evidence presented, is to be decided by the trier of fact, which had the opportunity to see and hear the witnesses (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). The determination of the trier of fact should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88 [1974]). As we find no basis to disturb the Criminal Court's determination, we affirm the judgment of conviction.

Golia, J.P., Pesce and Weston, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: December 02, 2009