People v. Rasmus

2025 NY Slip Op 05106

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: September 24, 2025
• Docket: Ind. No. 70880/22
• Status: Published

Opinion

People v Rasmus (2025 NY Slip Op 05106)

People v Rasmus

2025 NY Slip Op 05106

Decided on September 24, 2025

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 September 24, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
HECTOR D. LASALLE, P.J.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
WILLIAM G. FORD
JAMES P. MCCORMACK, JJ.

2023-09964
(Ind. No. 70880/22)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Antonio Rasmus, appellant.

Andrew E. MacAskill, Garden City, NY, for appellant.

Anne T. Donnelly, District Attorney, Mineola, NY (Tammy J. Smiley and Jared A. Chester of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Philippe Solages, Jr., J.), rendered September 20, 2023, convicting him of harassment in the second degree (two counts) and endangering the welfare of a child, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

On the evening of August 25, 2021, during the course of a heated verbal exchange, the defendant, inter alia, tossed water in his adult daughter's face and shoved his adult son. The altercation was witnessed by the defendant's 13-year-old daughter, who recorded the altercation on her cell phone and called 911. After a jury trial, the defendant was convicted of two counts of harassment in the second degree and endangering the welfare of a child. The defendant appeals.

In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15[5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633).

LASALLE, P.J., CHAMBERS, FORD and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court