Opinion
11080 Ind. 5073/14
02-25-2020
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Gabriel URENA, Defendant–Appellant.
Stanley Neustadter, Cardozo Criminal Appeals Clinic, New York (Lauren Miller of counsel), for appellant. Gabriel Urena, appellant pro se. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Jonathan Cantarero of counsel), for respondent.
Stanley Neustadter, Cardozo Criminal Appeals Clinic, New York (Lauren Miller of counsel), for appellant.
Gabriel Urena, appellant pro se.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Jonathan Cantarero of counsel), for respondent.
Renwick, J.P., Mazzarelli, Gesmer, Kern, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Juan M. Merchan, J.), rendered October 13, 2016, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts) and reckless endangerment in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 13 years, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence. The jury could have reasonably inferred, from the totality of evidence, including, among other things, defendant's statements to the police, that defendant fired a loaded and operable firearm (see People v. Samba, 97 A.D.3d 411, 414–415, 948 N.Y.S.2d 58 [1st Dept. 2012], lv denied 20 N.Y.3d 1065, 962 N.Y.S.2d 616, 985 N.E.2d 926 [2013]).
Defendant did not preserve his argument that the testimony of two detectives identifying a brief emission of light from the weapon, seen on surveillance video, as a muzzle flash was improper lay opinion, and we decline to review this claim in the interest of justice. Nor was there any further objection after the court instructed the jurors that they were the finders of fact and it was for them "to determine whether there was a muzzle flash or not" (see People v. Ross, 99 A.D.3d 483, 483, 952 N.Y.S.2d 35 [1st Dept. 2012], lv denied 20 N.Y.3d 1014, 960 N.Y.S.2d 357, 984 N.E.2d 332 [2013] ).
Defendant's pro se ineffective assistance claim is unreviewable on the present record, and his challenge to a 911 call is waived.