People v. Bornhoeft

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bornhoeft

53 A.D.3d 666, 860 N.Y.S.2d 918

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 29, 2008·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J), rendered August 18, 2006, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, aggravated cruelty to animals (four counts), criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and criminal trespass in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]; CPL 470.15 [5]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’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]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Fisher, J.P., Ritter, Florio and Carni, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J), rendered August 18, 2006, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, aggravated cruelty to animals (four counts), criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and criminal trespass in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]; CPL 470.15 [5]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’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]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Fisher, J.P., Ritter, Florio and Carni, JJ., concur.

People v. Bornhoeft, 53 A.D.3d 666, 860 N.Y.S.2d 918 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

53 A.D.3d 666 (People v. Bornhoeft) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related