Opinion
2017–05988 Ind.No. 1105/15
12-12-2018
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Elsa Marina SARAVIA MARTINEZ, Appellant.
Michael A. Ciaffa, Uniondale, NY, for appellant. Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Sarah S. Rabinowitz and Jason R. Richards of counsel), for respondent.
Michael A. Ciaffa, Uniondale, NY, for appellant.
Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Sarah S. Rabinowitz and Jason R. Richards of counsel), for respondent.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., SHERI S. ROMAN, ROBERT J. MILLER, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant was convicted of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree after she stabbed her ex-boyfriend, causing him serious injuries.
In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (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 accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v. Mateo , 2 N.Y.3d 383, 410, 779 N.Y.S.2d 399, 811 N.E.2d 1053 ; 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 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 challenge to the jury charge is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit (see People v. Davidson , 144 A.D.3d 938, 939, 41 N.Y.S.3d 553 ).
The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court erred in permitting the People to introduce evidence that, two days before the stabbing, she threatened to cut the complainant is also without merit. That evidence was properly admitted as relevant background material to enable the jury to understand the defendant's relationship with the complainant and as evidence of the defendant's motive and intent in the commission of the charged crimes (see People v. Molineux , 168 N.Y. 264, 61 N.E. 286 ; People v. Nanand , 137 A.D.3d 945, 947, 26 N.Y.S.3d 585 ; People v. Laverpool , 52 A.D.3d 622, 622, 860 N.Y.S.2d 565 ; People v. Hanson , 30 A.D.3d 537, 538, 818 N.Y.S.2d 128 ; People v. Howe , 292 A.D.2d 542, 542, 739 N.Y.S.2d 587 ).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte , 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.
DILLON, J.P., ROMAN, MILLER and DUFFY, JJ., concur.