People v. Morales (Eduardo)

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Morales (Eduardo)

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 21, 2018

Docket2018 NYSlipOp 50931(U)

StatusPublished

This text of People v. Morales (Eduardo) (People v. Morales (Eduardo)) 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. Morales (Eduardo), (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Eduardo Morales, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Heidi C. Cesare, J.), rendered June 15, 2017, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of attempted forcible touching and sexual abuse in the third degree, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Heidi C. Cesare, J.), rendered, June 15, 2017, affirmed.

The verdict convicting the defendant of attempted forcible touching (see Penal Law §§ 110/130.52[1]) and sexual abuse in the third degree (see Penal Law § 130.55) was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court's determination concerning credibility. The credited testimony of the victim, as corroborated to a substantial degree by testimony from two plain-clothes police officers, established that defendant positioned himself directly behind the victim, a stranger to him, as the victim was observing the Rockefeller Plaza Christmas tree, and repeatedly thrust his groin against the victim's buttocks, rubbing back and forth, until she moved away to another location. Defendant then followed the victim and after once again positioning himself directly behind her, repeatedly thrust his groin against her buttocks. The trial court could rationally infer that defendant engaged in "sexual contact" when he touched the victim's buttocks and that such touching was "for the purpose of gratifying [defendant's] sexual desire" (see Penal Law § 130.00[3]; People v Williams, 94 AD3d 1555 [2012]). Regarding forcible touching, it could be inferred from the evidence that defendant had a motive to abuse or degrade the victim, and there was no legitimate purpose for his acts (see Penal Law § 130.55[1]; Matter of Traekwon I., 152 AD3d 431, 432 [2017]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: June 21, 2018

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

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Eduardo Morales, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Heidi C. Cesare, J.), rendered June 15, 2017, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of attempted forcible touching and sexual abuse in the third degree, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Heidi C. Cesare, J.), rendered, June 15, 2017, affirmed.

The verdict convicting the defendant of attempted forcible touching (see Penal Law §§ 110/130.52[1]) and sexual abuse in the third degree (see Penal Law § 130.55) was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court's determination concerning credibility. The credited testimony of the victim, as corroborated to a substantial degree by testimony from two plain-clothes police officers, established that defendant positioned himself directly behind the victim, a stranger to him, as the victim was observing the Rockefeller Plaza Christmas tree, and repeatedly thrust his groin against the victim's buttocks, rubbing back and forth, until she moved away to another location. Defendant then followed the victim and after once again positioning himself directly behind her, repeatedly thrust his groin against her buttocks. The trial court could rationally infer that defendant engaged in "sexual contact" when he touched the victim's buttocks and that such touching was "for the purpose of gratifying [defendant's] sexual desire" (see Penal Law § 130.00[3]; People v Williams, 94 AD3d 1555 [2012]). Regarding forcible touching, it could be inferred from the evidence that defendant had a motive to abuse or degrade the victim, and there was no legitimate purpose for his acts (see Penal Law § 130.55[1]; Matter of Traekwon I., 152 AD3d 431, 432 [2017]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: June 21, 2018

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

People v. Morales (Eduardo), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-morales-eduardo-nyappterm-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack