People v. Richards, 2016–08753

• Decision Date: 19 September 2018
• Docket Number: Ind. No. 131/15,2016–08753
• Citation: 164 A.D.3d 1378,81 N.Y.S.3d 748 (Mem)
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Stephen RICHARDS, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

164 A.D.3d 1378
81 N.Y.S.3d 748 (Mem)

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Stephen RICHARDS, appellant.

2016–08753
Ind. No. 131/15

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

Submitted—May 15, 2018
September 19, 2018

Del Atwell, East Hampton, NY, for appellant.

William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.

ALAN D. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MARK C. DILLON, JEFFREY A. COHEN, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Craig Stephen Brown, J.), rendered July 22, 2016, convicting him of reckless endangerment in the first degree (two counts), criminal mischief in the third degree (two counts), and unlawful discharge of a firearm, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932 ), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of reckless endangerment in the first degree (see Penal Law § 120.25 ; People v. Patterson, 65 A.D.3d 705, 706, 884 N.Y.S.2d 768 ; People v. Lobban, 59 A.D.3d 566, 566, 872 N.Y.S.2d 557 ; People v. Teets, 293 A.D.2d 766, 767, 742 N.Y.S.2d 641 ). Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15(5), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt as to reckless endangerment in the first degree was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Romero, 7 N.Y.3d 633, 826 N.Y.S.2d 163, 859 N.E.2d 902 ).

The defendant's contention that the verdict was repugnant is unpreserved for appellate review, as he failed to raise the issue before the discharge of the jury (see People v. Alfaro, 66 N.Y.2d 985, 987, 499 N.Y.S.2d 378, 489 N.E.2d 1280 ; People v. Smith, 142 A.D.3d 1027, 1028, 37 N.Y.S.3d 442 ; People v. Lobban, 59 A.D.3d at 566–567, 872 N.Y.S.2d 557 ). In any event, the contention is without merit (see People v. Trappier, 87 N.Y.2d 55, 637 N.Y.S.2d 352, 660 N.E.2d 1131 ; People v. Smith, 142 A.D.3d at 1028, 37 N.Y.S.3d 442 ; People v....