People v. Narine

• Decision Date: 30 June 1997
• Citation: 660 N.Y.S.2d 994,240 A.D.2d 763
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Viswajeet NARINE, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 994

660 N.Y.S.2d 994

240 A.D.2d 763

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Viswajeet NARINE, Appellant.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 30, 1997.

Daniel L. Greenberg, New York City (David Crow, of counsel) and John Jay Legal Services, Inc., White Plains (Lissa Griffin, of counsel; Louis A. Zambrio and Gretchen M. Walther, on the brief), for appellant (one brief filed).

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens (John M. Castellano, Robin A. Forshaw, and Amy E. Corn, of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O'Dwyer, J.), rendered November 1, 1995, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree (three counts), reckless endangerment in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the People failed to disprove the defense of justification is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Mantilla, 220 A.D.2d 691, 632 N.Y.S.2d 654). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt and to disprove the defense of justification beyond a reasonable doubt. There was sufficient evidence presented at the trial to enable the jury to conclude that the defendant did not reasonably believe that the victim was about to use deadly physical force and that the defendant had an opportunity to retreat safely (see, Penal Law § 35.15[2][a]; People v. Goetz, 68 N.Y.2d 96, 506 N.Y.S.2d 18, 497 N.E.2d 41; People v. Mantilla, supra). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15[5] ).

The defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).

O'BRIEN, J.P., and RITTER, GOLDSTEIN and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.