Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see Penal Law § 160.00; People v Samuel, 84 AD3d 841 [2011]; People v Barksdale, 50 AD3d 400, 401 [2008]; People v Green, 277 AD2d 82, 83 [2000]). 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 NY3d 342 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the factfinder’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). 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 NY3d 633 [2006]). Rivera, J.P., Florio, Eng and Roman, JJ., concur.
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Karl Williams, Appellant
97 A.D.3d 768948 N.Y.S.2d 422
Authorities cited
No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.