People v Aziz (Fereydon)

Annotate this Case
[*1] People v Aziz (Fereydon) 2019 NY Slip Op 51557(U) Decided on October 4, 2019 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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, 2019
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Shulman, P.J., Gonzalez, Edmead, JJ.
570648/17

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Fereydon Aziz, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Ann E. Scherzer, J.), rendered September 6, 2017, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of two counts of sexual abuse in the third degree, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Ann E. Scherzer, J.), rendered, September 6, 2017, affirmed.

The verdict convicting the defendant of two counts of sexual abuse in the third degree (see Penal Law § 130.55) was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court's determination concerning credibility. The credited testimony of two plain-clothes police officers established that on two separate occasions, defendant positioned himself directly behind young teenage girls, strangers to him, as they were observing the ice skating rink at Rockefeller Center, and repeatedly pressed his groin against the victims' buttocks until they moved away. The trial court could rationally infer that defendant engaged in "sexual contact" when he touched the victims' buttocks and that such touching was "for the purpose of gratifying [defendant's] sexual desire" (Penal Law § 130.00[3]; People v Williams, 94 AD3d 1555 [2012]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.


I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: October 04, 2019

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.