Opinion
570322/15
02-17-2016
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Judith Lopez, Defendant-Appellant.
PRESENT: Lowe, III, P.J., Schoenfeld, Shulman, JJ.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Linda Poust-Lopez, J.), rendered October 17, 2014, after a nonjury trial, convicting her of harassment in the second degree, and imposing sentence.
Per Curiam.
Judgment of conviction (Linda Poust-Lopez, J.), rendered October 17, 2014, affirmed.
We find unavailing defendant's present challenge to the facial sufficiency of the underlying information. "[G]iven a fair and not overly restrictive or technical reading" (People v Casey, 95 NY2d 354, 360 [2000]), the sworn allegations that defendant telephoned complainant, threatening "if you go into the court" and provide certain testimony, "you are gonna get your face cut. I will cut your face," were sufficient, for pleading purposes, to establish reasonable cause to believe that defendant committed harassment in the second degree, and a prima facie case of defendant's commission of that offense (see Penal Law § 240.26[1]). Defendant's requisite intent to harass, annoy or alarm complainant was readily inferable from the facts alleged (see People v Collins, 178 AD2d 789, 789-790 [1991]).
The trial evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People, was sufficient to establish defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-9 [2007]). Moreover, after applying the appropriate standard of review (see id. at 348-349), we conclude that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). There is no basis for disturbing the Court's credibility determinations. The court, as factfinder, was warranted in concluding that defendant made a "genuine threat [to] physical[ly] harm" complainant (People v Dietze, 75 NY2d 47, 54 [1989]; see Matter of Czop v Czop, 21 AD3d 958, 959 [2005]; Matter of Jessica C. v Esteban B., 13 AD3d 183 [2004]; cf. Matter of Rafael F. v Pedro Pablo N., 106 AD3d 635 [2013]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT. I concur I concur I concur Decision Date: February 17, 2016