People v Houmita (Abdelhakim)

Annotate this Case
[*1] People v Houmita (Abdelhakim) 2018 NY Slip Op 50222(U) Decided on February 20, 2018 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 February 20, 2018
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Shulman, P.J., Gonzalez, Cooper, JJ.
570389/17

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Abdelhakim Houmita, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Kevin B. McGrath, J.), rendered September 20, 2016, convicting him, after a nonjury trial, of attempted petit larceny and attempted criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Kevin B. McGrath, J.), rendered September 20, 2016, affirmed.

The verdict convicting defendant of attempted petit larceny (see Penal Law §§ 110.00/155.25) and attempted criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree (see Penal Law §§ 110.00/165.40) was not against the weight of the evidence. The evidence supports the inference that defendant acted with larcenous intent when he secreted various items of merchandise in his personal bag, walked past a bank of cash registers without paying for the items and attempted to exit the Whole Foods store (see People v Olivo, 52 NY2d 309, 317-319 [1981]). There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations, including its rejection of defendant's explanation for his conduct (see People v Marks, 67 AD3d 477 [2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 803 [2010]; People v Kevrekian, 304 AD2d 374 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 583 [2003]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.


I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: February 20, 2018

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.