People v. Lema-Yaucan
This text of 160 N.Y.S.3d 618 (People v. Lema-Yaucan) 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.
Opinion
| People v Lema-Yaucan |
| 2022 NY Slip Op 01321 |
| Decided on March 2, 2022 |
| Appellate Division, Second 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 on March 2, 2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, J.P.
ROBERT J. MILLER
JOSEPH J. MALTESE
DEBORAH A. DOWLING, JJ.
2019-10952
(Ind. No. 17-00356)
v
Holger Lema-Yaucan, appellant.
James D. Licata, New City, NY (Ellen O'Hara Woods of counsel), for appellant.
Thomas E. Walsh II, District Attorney, New City, NY (Jacob B. Sher of counsel), for respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Sherri L. Eisenpress, J.), rendered August 6, 2019, convicting him of rape in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, strangulation in the second degree, aggravated criminal contempt, and endangering the welfare of a child (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his convictions is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 492). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15(5), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
IANNACCI, J.P., MILLER, MALTESE and DOWLING, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Maria T. Fasulo
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
160 N.Y.S.3d 618, 203 A.D.3d 754, 2022 NY Slip Op 01321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lema-yaucan-nyappdiv-2022.