Opinion
04-28-2017
Norman P. Effman, Public Defender, Warsaw (Adam W. Koch of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Donald G. O'Geen, District Attorney, Warsaw (Eric R. Schiener of Counsel), For Respondent.
Norman P. Effman, Public Defender, Warsaw (Adam W. Koch of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant.
Donald G. O'Geen, District Attorney, Warsaw (Eric R. Schiener of Counsel), For Respondent.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, DeJOSEPH, NEMOYER, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of promoting prison contraband in the first degree (Penal Law § 205.25 [2] ). Contrary to defendant's contention, we conclude that the evidence is legally sufficient to support the conviction (see People v. Mansilla, 143 A.D.3d 1263, 1263, 38 N.Y.S.3d 494 ; People v. Davey, 134 A.D.3d 1448, 1449, 22 N.Y.S.3d 713 ). Viewed 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 ), the evidence provided a "valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could lead a rational person to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence at trial" (People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672 ), i.e., that defendant possessed a flat, sharpened piece of metal that he wielded during a prison fight. Moreover, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime as charged to the jury (see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 ), we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Hood, 145 A.D.3d 1565, 1565–1566, 43 N.Y.S.3d 834 ; Mansilla, 143 A.D.3d at 1263, 38 N.Y.S.3d 494 ; see generally Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d at 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672 ). We have considered defendant's challenge to the severity of his sentence and conclude that it is without merit.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.