People v. Widmer
| Decision Date | 25 February 1988 |
| Citation | 525 N.Y.S.2d 353,137 A.D.2d 929 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Christina WIDMER, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Bruce Perlmutter, Woodridge, for appellant.
Stephen F. Lungen, Sullivan County Dist. Atty. (Bonnie M. Mitzner, of counsel), Monticello, for respondent.
Before KANE, J.P., and YESAWICH, LEVINE and HARVEY, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Sullivan County (Hanofee, J.), rendered January 27, 1986, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of grand larceny in the third degree, criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree, offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree and falsifying business records in the second degree.
Defendant stands convicted of several crimes related to her alleged fraudulent procurement of various public assistance benefits. In September 1984, defendant applied for public assistance on behalf of herself and her two minor children from the Sullivan County Department of Social Services. As part of the application process, defendant was required to provide certain information. She stated that she had not had any contact with her husband for over a year and that she did not know where he was located. She stated that she had been renting a trailer in Narrowsburg, Town of Cochecton, from a "Robert Markowitz". In compliance with the Department's request, she produced a rent receipt which purportedly verified this information. She was determined to be eligible for benefits and received $1,114 in public assistance and $452 in food stamps over a three-month period. A routine check with the State Department of Social Services raised suspicions of fraud. An ensuing investigation revealed that defendant resided at the International School for Krishna Consciousness (hereinafter ISKCON) in Lake Huntington, Town of Cochecton. ISKCON provided her and her family with free room and board. It was determined that defendant was not eligible for the public assistance and food stamps which she had received.
Defendant was subsequently indicted for the crimes of grand larceny in the third degree, criminal possession of a false instrument in the second degree, offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree and falsifying business records in the second degree. At trial, there was evidence that defendant had resided with her husband during the relevant period. There was also testimony indicating that no one by the name of Robert Markowitz owned property in the Town of Cochecton, that there was not a trailer where defendant had said she was living, and that the road where the trailer was supposedly located did not exist. Defendant was convicted on all counts of the indictment. She was sentenced to five years' probation. This appeal followed.
Defendant alleges that the People failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she committed the charged crimes. On appeal from a conviction after a jury trial, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the People ( People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 476 N.Y.S.2d 825, 465 N.E.2d 364, cert. denied 469 U.S. 932, 105 S.Ct. 327, 83 L.Ed.2d 264). Thus, if any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the conviction should, in the absence of other reversible error, be affirmed ( see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932). Here, a review of the trial evidence reveals that the People met their burden. For example, an officer of ISKCON testified that defendant and her husband were living...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Ressy
...126 A.D.3d 1175, 1179–1181, 5 N.Y.S.3d 600 [2015], lv. denied 25 N.Y.3d 1201, 16 N.Y.S.3d 524, 37 N.E.3d 1167 [2015] ; People v. Widmer, 137 A.D.2d 929, 931, 525 N.Y.S.2d 353 [1988], lv. denied 72 N.Y.2d 868, 532 N.Y.S.2d 518, 528 N.E.2d 908 [1988] ; compare People v. Rupnarine, 140 A.D.3d ......
-
People v. Morin
......Thomas, 148 A.D.2d 883, 884, 539 N.Y.S.2d 693, lv. denied 74 N.Y.2d 748, 545 N.Y.S.2d 122, 543 N.E.2d 765; People v. Widmer, 137 A.D.2d 929, 931, 525 N.Y.S.2d 353, lv. denied 72 N.Y.2d 868, 532 N.Y.S.2d 518, 528 N.E.2d 908). And, [192 A.D.2d 792] with respect to count five, it suffices to note that defendant was found not guilty of this count. With regard to his written statement, defendant argues ......
-
People v. Haqq
...... This claim is meritless. The sufficiency of an indictment is not reviewable on appeal from an ensuing judgment of conviction which is supported by legally sufficient trial evidence . Page 758. (CPL 210.30[6]; People v. Widmer, 137 A.D.2d [159 A.D.2d 984] 929, 931, 525 N.Y.S.2d 353, lv. denied 72 N.Y.2d 868, 532 N.Y.S.2d 518, 528 N.E.2d 908). The trial evidence against defendant was not only sufficient, it was overwhelming. Similarly without merit is defendant's argument that the People violated the ......
- People v. Widmer