People v. Alteri
| Citation | 49 A.D.3d 918,853 N.Y.S.2d 204,2008 NY Slip Op 01877 |
| Decision Date | 06 March 2008 |
| Docket Number | 100925. |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MICHAEL E. ALTERI, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Essex County (Meyer, J.), rendered March 6, 2007, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of endangering the welfare of a child and sexual abuse in the third degree.
Defendant and his girlfriend attended a party during the first weekend of December 2005 at a residence in the Village of Ticonderoga, Essex County. Among those present was the 16-year-old victim, who became intoxicated as the party progressed and eventually went to a bedroom where she and defendant's girlfriend began kissing. Shortly thereafter, defendant entered the bedroom and, while his girlfriend performed oral sex upon him, he allegedly fondled the victim. Based upon such conduct, defendant was indicted for, among other things, endangering the welfare of a child and sexual abuse in the third degree. He was convicted by a jury of these two crimes and now appeals.
Defendant asserts that there was inadequate evidence both of the alleged touching and also the date when the incident occurred and, thus, the verdict was not supported by legally sufficient evidence. The standard of review on a challenge for legal sufficiency is whether "viewed in the light most favorable to the People, there exists a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences from which a rational juror could conclude that each of the elements of the subject charges upon which defendant was convicted were established beyond a reasonable doubt" (People v Richardson, 28 AD3d 1002, 1004 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 817 [2006]; see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). With regard to the touching of the victim, defendant's girlfriend acknowledged that she saw defendant touching the victim's breast. Although the victim's recall was not clear because of her level of intoxication, she testified that after the subject evening defendant stated to her that he had placed his hand on her vagina. We find this proof sufficient regarding touching. Similarly, the evidence was sufficient to establish that the conduct occurred on the first weekend of December 2005 as alleged in the indictment. Defendant presented proof that placed him at a fire department Christmas party during part of the evening of Saturday, December 3, 2005. Nevertheless, both the victim and defendant's girlfriend recalled that the incident occurred during the first weekend of December 2005.
Since an acquittal would not have been unreasonable, we have weighed the conflicting testimony and rational inferences that may be drawn therefrom (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]; People v Chaffee, 30 AD3d 763, 764 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 846 [2006]). According deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses and assess credibility (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 495; People v Stasiak, 25 AD3d 1025, 1026 [2006]) and noting that a jury's verdict is not necessarily against the weight of the evidence merely because it accepts part of a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. McCray
...43 A.D.3d 493, 495, 840 N.Y.S.2d 472 [2007],lv. denied9 N.Y.3d 1007, 850 N.Y.S.2d 395, 880 N.E.2d 881 [2007];see People v. Alteri, 49 A.D.3d 918, 920, 853 N.Y.S.2d 204 [2008] ). Likewise, defendant's assertion on appeal—that the victim's testimony that they witnessed police officers draw th......
-
People v. Gregory
...the jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt each element of the crimes for which defendant was convicted ( see People v. Alteri, 49 A.D.3d 918, 919-920, 853 N.Y.S.2d 204 [2008]; People v. Nowinski, 36 A.D.3d 1082, 1083, 827 N.Y.S.2d 356 [2007], lv. denied 8 N.Y.3d 989, 838 N.Y.S.2d 492, 869 ......
-
People v. Fancher
...Nevertheless, a jury is entitled to accept the testimony of a witness in part while rejecting the rest ( see People v. Alteri, 49 A.D.3d 918, 920, 853 N.Y.S.2d 204 [2008] ). Here, the jury could have credited Aitken's testimony, at least in part, regarding defendant's participation in the s......
-
People v. Vandebogart
...562, 978 N.E.2d 114 [2012] ). Defendant failed to demonstrate that any of the exceptions was applicable (see People v. Alteri, 49 A.D.3d 918, 920, 853 N.Y.S.2d 204 [2008] ; People v. Thompson, 27 A.D.3d 888, 890, 811 N.Y.S.2d 199 [2006], lv denied 6 N.Y.3d 853, 816 N.Y.S.2d 759, 849 N.E.2d ......