People v. Perry Board

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Perry Board

114 A.D.3d 585, 980 N.Y.S.2d 462

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 25, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 114 A.D.3d 585 (People v. Perry Board) 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.

Bluebook

People v. Perry Board, 114 A.D.3d 585, 980 N.Y.S.2d 462 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alvin Yearwood, J.), rendered March 22, 2012, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of two counts of harassment in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 15 days, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations.

The court properly exercised its discretion in declining to admit into evidence photographs of the victim that were offered to show the victim’s demeanor shortly before she testified, since these photographs lacked sufficient relevance to any material issue in the case. In any event, the court, sitting as trier of fact, [586]*586was indirectly made aware of the alleged contrast between the victim’s demeanor before and during her testimony. Concur— Sweeny, J.E, Andrias, Moskowitz, DeGrasse and Gische, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alvin Yearwood, J.), rendered March 22, 2012, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of two counts of harassment in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 15 days, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations.

The court properly exercised its discretion in declining to admit into evidence photographs of the victim that were offered to show the victim’s demeanor shortly before she testified, since these photographs lacked sufficient relevance to any material issue in the case. In any event, the court, sitting as trier of fact, [586]*586was indirectly made aware of the alleged contrast between the victim’s demeanor before and during her testimony. Concur— Sweeny, J.E, Andrias, Moskowitz, DeGrasse and Gische, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.3d 585, 980 N.Y.S.2d 462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-perry-board-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack