From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Young

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Nov 7, 2018
166 A.D.3d 664 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

2016–00699 Ind. No. 2242/14

11-07-2018

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. David YOUNG, Appellant.

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Laura B. Indellicati of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, Ellen C. Abbot, Jamaica, and Timothy R. McGrath of counsel), for respondent.


Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Laura B. Indellicati of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, Ellen C. Abbot, Jamaica, and Timothy R. McGrath of counsel), for respondent.

RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., SANDRA L. SGROI, ROBERT J. MILLER, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Joel L. Blumenfeld, J.), rendered December 21, 2015, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted of robbery in the first degree after a nonjury trial. On appeal, he contends that, in reaching its verdict, the trial court improperly shifted the burden of proof to him and violated his right against self-incrimination.

"[I]n a bench trial, it is presumed that the Judge sitting as the trier of fact made [her or] his decision based upon appropriate legal criteria" ( People v. Lucas, 291 A.D.2d 890, 891, 737 N.Y.S.2d 732 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see generally People v. Moreno, 70 N.Y.2d 403, 406, 521 N.Y.S.2d 663, 516 N.E.2d 200 ). Here, the record as a whole—which includes the trial judge's unequivocal statements that the defendant had no obligation to testify and that the People proved the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt—does not reflect that the court shifted the burden of proof or convicted the defendant based upon his failure to testify (see People v. Williams, 122 A.D.3d 647, 994 N.Y.S.2d 426 ; cf. People v. Fields, 87 N.Y.2d 821, 823, 637 N.Y.S.2d 355, 660 N.E.2d 1134 ).

BALKIN, J.P., SGROI, MILLER and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Young

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Nov 7, 2018
166 A.D.3d 664 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

People v. Young

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. David Young, appellant.

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Nov 7, 2018

Citations

166 A.D.3d 664 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
166 A.D.3d 664
2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 7465

Citing Cases

People v. Ross

The defendant's contention that recusal was warranted due to the County Court's bias against him is also…

In re Kevon G. (Anonymous).

Further, since the same evidence was received at the fact-finding hearing without objection by Keith G.'s…