People v Manzino (Robert)

[*1] People v Manzino (Robert) 2007 NY Slip Op 51215(U) [16 Misc 3d 126(A)] Decided on June 11, 2007 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 June 11, 2007
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : RUDOLPH, P.J., LaCAVA and EMERSON, JJ
2006-1162 W CR.

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Robert Manzino, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Mount Vernon, Westchester County (William Edwards, J.), rendered May 17, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of harassment in the second degree.

Judgment of conviction 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 harassment in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt (Penal Law § 240.26 [1]). Intent to commit a crime may be implied by the act itself, or by defendant's conduct and the surrounding
circumstances (see People v McGee, 204 AD2d 353 [1994]; People v McTiernan, 13 Misc 3d 127[A], 2006 NY Slip Op 51664[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]). Here, defendant's actions, evincing a threat of force, together with his accompanying words, established his intent to harass, annoy or alarm the complainant (see People v Dorns, 88 Misc 2d 1064 [1978], affd 96 Misc 2d 54 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 1978]). Accordingly, the judgment convicting defendant of harassment in the second degree is affirmed.

Rudolph, P.J., LaCava and Emerson, JJ., concur. [*2]
Decision Date: June 11, 2007