People v Sasson (Mojan)

[*1] People v Sasson (Mojan) 2010 NY Slip Op 50748(U) [27 Misc 3d 134(A)] Decided on April 21, 2010 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 April 21, 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : MOLIA, J.P., LaCAVA and IANNACCI, JJ
2008-1176 N CR.

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Mojan Sasson, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Village of Kings Point, Nassau County (Howard Miskin, J.), rendered May 18, 2008. The judgment convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of failing to stop at a stop sign.

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Defendant was charged, in a simplified traffic information, with failing to stop at a stop sign (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1172 [a]) at the corner of East Shore Road and Remsen Road, on September 8, 2007. In the supporting deposition, Police Officer Robert Graiff provided factual allegations establishing that defendant had failed to stop at said stop sign. Following a nonjury trial, defendant was convicted of the offense charged.

The evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), was legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt of failing to stop at a stop sign. Moreover, giving much deference to the Justice Court's credibility determinations (see People v Lane, 7 NY3d 888, 890 [2006]; see also People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 644-645 [2006]), even as we conduct our own review of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 7 NY3d 342 [2007]), we find that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

We further find that the simplified traffic information on its face was legally sufficient since it conformed to the requirements prescribed by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles (see CPL 100.25, 100.40; People v Key, 45 NY2d 111 [1978]). Furthermore, in the supporting deposition, the Police Officer provided reasonable cause for the belief that defendant had failed to stop at a stop sign (see CPL 100.25 [2]; People v Elm, 25 Misc 3d 141[A], 2009 NY Slip Op 52459[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2009]).

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed. [*2]

Molia, J.P., LaCava and Iannacci, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: April 21, 2010