People v. Agudio

2021 NY Slip Op 03224, 149 N.Y.S.3d 326, 194 A.D.3d 1270
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 20, 2021
Docket111292
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 2021 NY Slip Op 03224 (People v. Agudio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Agudio, 2021 NY Slip Op 03224, 149 N.Y.S.3d 326, 194 A.D.3d 1270 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

People v Agudio (2021 NY Slip Op 03224)
People v Agudio
2021 NY Slip Op 03224
Decided on May 20, 2021
Appellate Division, Third Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided and Entered:May 20, 2021

111292

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

v

Ariel Agudio, Appellant.


Calendar Date:February 8, 2021
Before:Egan Jr., J.P., Clark, Aarons, Pritzker and Colangelo, JJ.

Law Office of Mark S. Mishler, PC, Albany (Mark S. Mishler of counsel), for appellant.

P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Vincent Stark of counsel), for respondent.



Colangelo, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (McDonough, J.), rendered June 16, 2017 in Albany County, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of falsely reporting an incident in the third degree (two counts).

In April 2016, defendant was charged in an 11-count indictment with one count of assault in the third degree, three counts of attempted assault in the third degree, three counts of harassment in the second degree and four counts of falsely reporting an incident in the third degree for her involvement in, and subsequent reporting of, an altercation that occurred on a city bus bound for the State University of New York at Albany (hereinafter SUNY Albany) campus. After four counts were dismissed, the trial proceeded on the remaining counts, some of which were renumbered. As relevant here, the renumbered indictment charged defendant, in counts 4 and 7, with falsely reporting an incident in the third degree. Specifically, count 4 alleged that defendant, knowing the information to be false, reported, via an emergency 911 call, that "she was 'jumped' on a bus by a group of males, that it was a racial crime, and that she was struck by boys and called [the] '[N-word]'" (hereinafter the racial slur). Count 7 alleged that defendant, knowing the information to be false, circulated an allegation, via social media and through an appearance at an event on the SUNY Albany campus, that she was the victim of a racially-motivated assault on a bus. Following a jury trial, defendant and codefendant Asha Burwell were convicted of counts 4 and 7 and acquitted of the remaining charges.[FN1] Defendant joined in Burwell's motion to dismiss and/or set aside the verdict pursuant to CPL 330.30 (1), alleging, among other things, that the verdict was repugnant as a matter of law and that count 7 impermissibly infringed upon her First Amendment right of free speech. Supreme Court denied the motion in its entirety and sentenced defendant to concurrent terms of three years of probation on each conviction, assessed a fine and ordered community service. Defendant appeals.

Defendant contends that the verdict is not supported by legally sufficient evidence and is against the weight of the evidence. "When reviewing the legal sufficiency of the evidence, this Court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the People and evaluate whether there is any valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could lead a rational person to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence at trial and as a matter of law satisfy the proof and burden requirements for every element of the crimes charged" (People v Rudge, 185 AD3d 1214, 1215 [2020] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted], lv denied 35 NY3d 1070 [2020]; see People v Hilton, 185 AD3d 1147, 1148 [2020], lv denied 35 NY3d 1095 [2020]). In contrast, when conducting a weight of the evidence review, we must "view the evidence in a neutral light and determine first whether a [*2]different verdict would have been unreasonable and, if not, then weigh the relative probative force of conflicting testimony and the relative strength of conflicting inferences that may be drawn from the testimony to determine if the verdict is supported by the weight of the evidence" (People v Caden N., 189 AD3d 84, 89 [2020] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted], lv denied 36 NY3d 1050 [2021]; see People v Callahan, 186 AD3d 943, 943-944 [2020]; People v McCabe, 182 AD3d 772, 773 [2020]; People v McCoy, 169 AD3d 1260, 1261-1262 [2019], lv denied 33 NY3d 1033 [2019]). As relevant here, "[a] person is guilty of falsely reporting an incident in the third degree when, knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to be false or baseless, he or she . . . [i]nitiates or circulates a false report . . . of an alleged occurrence

. . . of a crime . . . under circumstances in which it is not unlikely that public alarm or inconvenience will result" (Penal Law § 240.50 [1]) or "[g]ratuitously reports to a law enforcement officer or agency . . . false information relating to an actual offense or incident" (Penal Law § 240.50 [3] [c]).

The factual background is substantially similar to that set forth in our decision in People v Burwell (183 AD3d 173, 176-179 [2020], lv denied 35 NY3d 1043 [2020]). The trial testimony of the People's witnesses revealed that, at approximately 1:00 a.m. on the night of the incident, defendant, Burwell and Alexis Briggs [FN2] were on the route No. 11 bus that was traveling from the downtown area of the City of Albany towards the SUNY Albany campus. Most of the passengers were SUNY Albany students. A verbal altercation arose when defendant was unsuccessful in her attempt to stop Mary Glisson, a rear seat passenger that boarded the bus after consuming two beers, from singing "99 Bottles of Beer on the Wall." Testimony revealed that defendant stood up and yelled at Glisson to be quiet, stating, "I'm from Long Island, I can f*** you up." Glisson testified that her friend, Gabrielle Camacho, yelled, "you're f***ing ignorant, get a job" to defendant, Burwell and Briggs, and that, thereafter, Camacho was punched in the face. Glisson further testified that, during the incident, she heard the term "white ignorant bitch." Glisson testified that she was hit, but could not identify who hit her, and she sustained injuries to her hands and knuckles. Glisson recounted that, prior to the physical altercation, defendant, Burwell and Briggs made comments about Glisson's ability, as a white woman, to sing loudly and annoyingly and their inability, as black women, to object to the singing. Benta Nkromah, also present, testified that defendant and Burwell attacked Glisson and that she heard defendant say "stupid white bitches" before the attack. Nkromah testified that she did not hear any other racial comments.

Bianca Deleon, who was sitting in the rear of the bus, testified that defendant, Burwell and Briggs [*3]called Glisson and the other rear passengers "white bitch, bitches." Mark Pronovost testified that he attempted to ascertain the basis of the heated verbal exchanges between the different groups on the bus and was told that it was a "black issue." Pronovost was among the passengers who asked defendant to sit down when she became visibly annoyed by Glisson's singing. He recounted that defendant responded by saying, "[B]ecause I'm black . . .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Lorenz
178 N.Y.S.3d 836 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Leigh
174 N.Y.S.3d 494 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Drumgold
2022 NY Slip Op 03544 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Perkins
203 A.D.3d 1337 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Harris
203 A.D.3d 1320 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Lafountain
2021 NY Slip Op 06885 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Johnson
2021 NY Slip Op 04162 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2021 NY Slip Op 03224, 149 N.Y.S.3d 326, 194 A.D.3d 1270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-agudio-nyappdiv-2021.