People v Goldbaum (Ronald)

[*1] People v Goldbaum (Ronald) 2003 NY Slip Op 51624(U) Decided on December 12, 2003 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the Official Reports.

Decided on December 12, 2003
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM : 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT:PESCE, P.J., ARONIN and PATTERSON, JJ.
NO. 2001-154 Q CR

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, -

against

RONALD GOLDBAUM, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Criminal Court, Queens County (S. Knopf, J.), rendered January 25, 2002, convicting him, after trial, of attempted criminal contempt in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 215.50 [3]) and imposing sentence.

Judgment of conviction unanimously affirmed.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the People (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), the evidence was legally sufficient to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant violated a condition of an order of protection, issued on behalf of defendant's estranged wife, barring communications by telephone at her home. Complainant identified defendant as the caller who left a telephone message on her answering machine (Prince, Richardson on Evidence § 7-202 [f] [Farrell 11th ed]; People v Mackey, 49 NY2d 274, 279; People v Sassower, NYLJ, Nov. 6, 1998 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]). We defer to the court's assessment of credibility (People v Mirabal, 278 AD2d 526, 527; People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88) particularly, as here, where the court relied on objective evidence, the tape recording, and compared it to the testifying defendant's own voice. Thus, in the exercise of our factual review authority, we are also satisfied that the verdict was not contrary to the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495).

We have reviewed defendant's remaining claims of error and find them without merit (People v Maxam, 161 AD2d 961; People v Bishop, 111 AD2d 398; People v Foy, 155 Misc 2d 81, 83-84 [Crim Ct, Bronx County], affd, 166 Misc 2d 358, affd 88 NY2d 742). [*2]
Decision Date: December 12, 2003