People v. Wellcome

• Decision Date: 16 February 2010
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Sean WELLCOME, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

897 N.Y.S.2d 137
70 A.D.3d 983

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Sean WELLCOME, appellant.

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

Feb. 16, 2010.

897 N.Y.S.2d 137

Palermo, Palermo & Tuohy, P.C., Smithtown, N.Y. (Matthew Tuohy and Stephen Preziosi of counsel), for appellant.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Ronnie Jane Lamm and Guy Arcidiacono of counsel), for respondent.

PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., JOSEPH COVELLO, RUTH C. BALKIN, and LEONARD B. AUSTIN, JJ.

70 A.D.3d 983

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Braslow, J.), rendered February 14, 2003, convicting him of burglary in the first degree (two counts), assault in the second degree, and resisting arrest (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

897 N.Y.S.2d 138

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions of burglary in the first degree is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Hawkins, 11 N.Y.3d 484, 872 N.Y.S.2d 395, 900 N.E.2d 946; People v. Lane, 7 N.Y.3d 888, 826 N.Y.S.2d 599, 860 N.E.2d 61; People v. Payne, 3 N.Y.3d 266, 786 N.Y.S.2d 116, 819 N.E.2d 634). 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 was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of those crimes beyond a reasonable doubt. In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence as to those counts ( see CPL 470.15[5]; People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe their demeanor ( see People v. Mateo, 2 N.Y.3d 383, 410, 779 N.Y.S.2d 399, 811 N.E.2d 1053, cert. denied 542 U.S. 946, 124 S.Ct. 2929, 159 L.Ed.2d 828; People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt on both counts of burglary 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 evidence with respect to the defendant's prior bad acts was properly admitted at trial as relevant to, inter alia, the defendant's motive or intent in entering or remaining unlawfully at...