People v. Lewis (Alphonso)

76 Misc. 3d 137(A), 2022 NY Slip Op 50976(U)
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedOctober 6, 2022
Docket570172/18
StatusUnpublished

This text of 76 Misc. 3d 137(A) (People v. Lewis (Alphonso)) 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. Lewis (Alphonso), 76 Misc. 3d 137(A), 2022 NY Slip Op 50976(U) (N.Y. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

People v Lewis (2022 NY Slip Op 50976(U)) [*1]

People v Lewis (Alphonso)
2022 NY Slip Op 50976(U) [76 Misc 3d 137(A)]
Decided on October 6, 2022
Appellate Term, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.


Decided on October 6, 2022
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Brigantti, J.P., Tisch, Michael, JJ.
570172/18

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Alphonso Lewis, Defendant-Appellant.


Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Kate Paek, J.), rendered December 14, 2017, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of attempted endangering the welfare of a child and harassment in the second degree, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Kate Paek, J.), rendered December 14, 2017, affirmed.

Defendant's challenges to the legal sufficiency of the evidence with respect to particular elements of the charged offenses are unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 492 [2008]), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. In any event, 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 defendant's guilt of attempted endangering the welfare of a child (see Penal Law §§ 110.00, 260.10[1]) and harassment in the second degree (see Penal Law § 240.26[1]) beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial court, as fact finder, could reasonably conclude that defendant school monitor - who grabbed the arm of the child victim (who was simply speaking to his classmates when he was not supposed to), then forcefully held the child's arm with a hard, sustained grip while pulling him to the back of the line, causing multiple bruises - was aware that his conduct could likely result in harm to a child (see People v Zeifman, 11 AD3d 288 [2004]; People v Vasquez, 75 Misc 3d 132[A], 2022 NY Slip Op 50451[U][App Term, 2nd Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2022]) and acted with the intent to harass, annoy and alarm (see People v Correa, 75 AD3d 478, 479 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 892 [2010]; People v Jackson, 66 Misc 3d 132[A], 2019 NY Slip Op 52081[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2019]).

Nor was the verdict against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis upon which to disturb the trial court's determinations concerning credibility.

All concur

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Clerk of the Court
Decision Date: October 6, 2022

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. Hawkins
900 N.E.2d 946 (New York Court of Appeals, 2008)
People v. Contes
454 N.E.2d 932 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
People v. Correa
75 A.D.3d 478 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Vasquez (Yessenia)
75 Misc. 3d 132(A) (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
76 Misc. 3d 137(A), 2022 NY Slip Op 50976(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lewis-alphonso-nyappterm-2022.