Opinion
2012-07188, Ind. No. 4609/09.
02-11-2015
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Ruben MORGAN, appellant.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Jenin Younes of counsel), for appellant. Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Jodi L. Mandel, Mary C. Pennisi, and Darren Geist of counsel), for respondent.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Jenin Younes of counsel), for appellant.
Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Jodi L. Mandel, Mary C. Pennisi, and Darren Geist of counsel), for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., RUTH C. BALKIN, L. PRISCILLA HALL, and SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.
Opinion Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Riviezzo, J.), rendered June 22, 2012, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the second degree, reckless endangerment in the first degree, reckless endangerment in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for attempted murder in the second degree (see CPL 470.05[2] ; People v. McLawrence, 114 A.D.3d 964, 983 N.Y.S.2d 806 ; People v. Williams, 38 A.D.3d 925, 833 N.Y.S.2d 160 ). 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 the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of that crime beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v. McLawrence, 114 A.D.3d at 964, 983 N.Y.S.2d 806 ; People v. Caldwell, 98 A.D.3d 1272, 951 N.Y.S.2d 293 ; People v. Hall, 242 A.D.2d 734, 664 N.Y.S.2d 930 ). Moreover, 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, 348, 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 demeanor (see People v. Mateo, 2 N.Y.3d 383, 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 on that count 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 ).
Furthermore, the record reveals that the defendant's trial counsel provided him with meaningful representation (see People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400 ). We find no merit to the defendant's contention that the failure of the defendant's counsel to seek a severance constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel (see People v. Ennis, 11 N.Y.3d 403, 872 N.Y.S.2d 364, 900 N.E.2d 915 ; People v. Salton, 74 A.D.3d 997, 998, 905 N.Y.S.2d 199 ; People v. Dozier, 32 A.D.3d 1346, 1347, 821 N.Y.S.2d 726 ; People v. Johnson, 32 A.D.3d 761, 820 N.Y.S.2d 800 ; People v. Green, 27 A.D.3d 231, 233, 810 N.Y.S.2d 188 ; People v. Taylor, 5 A.D.3d 333, 334, 773 N.Y.S.2d 555 ).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).