Opinion
2014-02-7
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Adam WEBSTER, Defendant–Appellant.
Kathleen P. Reardon, Rochester, for Defendant–Appellant. Jason L. Cook, District Attorney, Penn Yan (Patrick T. Chamberlain of Counsel), for Respondent.
Kathleen P. Reardon, Rochester, for Defendant–Appellant. Jason L. Cook, District Attorney, Penn Yan (Patrick T. Chamberlain of Counsel), for Respondent.
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, and SCONIERS, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of failure to register as a sex offender (Correction Law §§ 168–f [4]; 168–t). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that County Court improperly permitted the prosecutor to question a defense witness concerning the witness's adjudication as a youthful offender ( seeCPL 470.05[2]; see generally People v. Murray, 17 A.D.3d 1042, 1043, 794 N.Y.S.2d 199, lv. denied5 N.Y.3d 792, 801 N.Y.S.2d 813, 835 N.E.2d 673), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( seeCPL 470.15[6][a] ). Contrary to defendant's further contention, we conclude that the evidence, 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), is legally sufficient to support the conviction. 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 further conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence ( see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672). The jury was entitled to credit the testimony of the People's witnesses and to reject the conflicting testimony of the defense witnesses ( see People v. Moore, 227 A.D.2d 227, 227, 642 N.Y.S.2d 288, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 990, 649 N.Y.S.2d 397, 672 N.E.2d 623). Finally, we have considered the alleged deficiencies in defense counsel's performance and conclude that defendant received meaningful representation ( see generally People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.