People v. Browning

Decision Date02 May 2014
Citation984 N.Y.S.2d 525,2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 03097,117 A.D.3d 1471
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Dennis BROWNING, Defendant–Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Michael J. Stachowski, P.C., Buffalo (Michael J. Stachowski of Counsel), for DefendantAppellant.

Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (Nicholas T. Texido of Counsel), for Respondent.

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, SCONIERS AND VALENTINO, JJ.

MEMORANDUM:

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, following a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03[3] ). Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime in this nonjury trial ( see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1), we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence ( see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672). We reject defendant's contention that County Court erred in admitting the testimony of a police officer regarding the meaning of coded language used in a recorded conversation. Contrary to defendant's contention, expert testimony interpreting the meaning of words is not restricted to narcotics cases ( see People v. Inoa, 109 A.D.3d 765, 766, 971 N.Y.S.2d 530;People v. Pendelton, 90 A.D.3d 1234, 1235 n. 2, 934 N.Y.S.2d 611,lv. denied18 N.Y.3d 996, 945 N.Y.S.2d 651, 968 N.E.2d 1007), and the record establishes that the police officer was qualified to interpret the language based on his experience ( see Matott v. Ward, 48 N.Y.2d 455, 459, 423 N.Y.S.2d 645, 399 N.E.2d 532;People v. Wyant, 98 A.D.3d 1277, 1277–1278, 951 N.Y.S.2d 294).

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • People v. Cogdell
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • March 12, 2015
    ...815, 816–817, 570 N.Y.S.2d 857 [1991], lv. denied 78 N.Y.2d 920, 573 N.Y.S.2d 472, 577 N.E.2d 1064 [1991] ; cf. People v. Browning, 117 A.D.3d 1471, 1471, 984 N.Y.S.2d 525 [2014], lv. denied 23 N.Y.3d 1060, 994 N.Y.S.2d 319, 18 N.E.3d 1140 [2014] ). An individual, later identified as defend......
  • People v. Barksdale
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • June 12, 2015
    ...the record establishes that the police officer was qualified to interpret the language based on his experience” (People v. Browning, 117 A.D.3d 1471, 1471, 984 N.Y.S.2d 525, lv. denied 23 N.Y.3d 1060, 994 N.Y.S.2d 319, 18 N.E.3d 1140 ). Although in one instance the officer may have gone bey......
  • People v. Isaac
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • June 11, 2021
    ...allowed a police officer to testify about the meaning of coded language used in the text messages ( see People v. Browning , 117 A.D.3d 1471, 1471, 984 N.Y.S.2d 525 [4th Dept. 2014], lv denied 23 N.Y.3d 1060, 994 N.Y.S.2d 319, 18 N.E.3d 1140 [2014] ). Finally, the court properly denied defe......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT