People v. Bvunzawabaya (Delight)

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedSeptember 17, 2018
Docket2018 NYSlipOp 51309(U)
StatusPublished

This text of People v. Bvunzawabaya (Delight) (People v. Bvunzawabaya (Delight)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court 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. Bvunzawabaya (Delight), (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion



The People of the State of New York,

against

Delight Bvunzawabaya, Defendant-Appellant.


Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Larry R.C. Stephen, J.), rendered March 11, 2013, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of unlawful solicitation in the subway, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Larry R.C. Stephen, J.), rendered March 11, 2013, affirmed.

The accusatory instrument was not jurisdictionally defective. Sworn police allegations that defendant was observed in a specified subway station, "approach[ing] and solicit[ing] a MetroCard swipe from several passengers by stating (in substance): Can you swipe me in?," and that defendant lacked permission or authority to solicit entry into the subway system, were sufficiently evidentiary in character (People v Allen, 92 NY2d 378, 385 [1998]) to establish that defendant panhandled in a subway facility in violation of New York City Transit Authority Rule [21 NYCRR] § 1050.6(b)(2).

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348—349 [2007]). The credibility issues raised by defendant were properly placed before the trier of fact and, after considering the relative force of the conflicting testimony and the competing inferences that may be drawn therefrom, we find no reason to disturb the court's determination to credit the arresting officer's testimony rather than defendant's.THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.


I concur I concur I concur Decision Date: September 17, 2018

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

Related

People v. Danielson
880 N.E.2d 1 (New York Court of Appeals, 2007)
People v. Allen
703 N.E.2d 1229 (New York Court of Appeals, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
People v. Bvunzawabaya (Delight), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bvunzawabaya-delight-nyappterm-2018.