People v. Jackson

• Decision Date: 26 June 2014
• Citation: 118 A.D.3d 635,988 N.Y.S.2d 184,2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 04854
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Anthony JACKSON, Defendant–Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

118 A.D.3d 635
988 N.Y.S.2d 184
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 04854

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Anthony JACKSON, Defendant–Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

June 26, 2014.

Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Désirée Sheridan of counsel), for appellant.

Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Diane A. Shearer of counsel), for respondent.

MAZZARELLI, J.P., ACOSTA, FREEDMAN, RICHTER, CLARK, JJ.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ann Donnelly, J.), rendered July 19, 2010, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of trespass, and sentencing him to a conditional discharge for a period of 1 year, and 10 days of community service, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348–349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ). There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations. A lack of license or privilege to enter premises

[988 N.Y.S.2d 185]

may be established by circumstantial evidence, including evidence of consciousness of guilt (Matter of Lonique M., 93 A.D.3d 203, 205–206, 939 N.Y.S.2d 341 [1st Dept.2012] ). Defendant entered a New York City Housing Authority building by means of neither a key nor a buzzer, but by taking advantage of the door being opened when someone exited. Defendant initially lied to the police about being a resident of the building, and then admitted that he was not a resident. His false statement evinced a consciousness of guilt ( see People v. Ficarrota, 91 N.Y.2d 244, 250, 668 N.Y.S.2d 993, 691 N.E.2d 1017 [1997];Lonique M., 93 A.D.3d at 206, 939 N.Y.S.2d 341) that, when coupled with his means of entry, supported the inference that he entered unlawfully.

The accusatory instrument was legally sufficient to establish the element of entry without license or privilege, and it was not required to negate the possibility that one of the numerous residents of the building invited defendant to enter ( see People v. Davis, 13 N.Y.3d 17, 31–32, 884 N.Y.S.2d 665, 912 N.E.2d 1044 [2009];see also Lonique M., 93 A.D.3d at 207, 939 N.Y.S.2d 341).