People v. Zeifman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Zeifman

11 A.D.3d 288, 782 N.Y.S.2d 461, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11938

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

DecidedOctober 14, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 A.D.3d 288 (People v. Zeifman) 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. Zeifman, 11 A.D.3d 288, 782 N.Y.S.2d 461, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11938 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered April 2, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of endangering the welfare of a child, and sentencing him to a conditional discharge for a period of one year and 50 hours of community service, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility, including its rejection of defendant’s incredible testimony, which was contradicted by the statements he made at the scene. Credible testimony from disinterested bystanders, along with medical evidence, established that defendant forcefully kicked a five-year-old child, causing him to fall against a wall. Defendant’s conduct created the type of risk to a child contemplated by the statute (Penal Law § 260.10 [1]). The fact that defendant was acquitted of the assault and attempted assault charges does not warrant a different conclusion (see People v Rayam, 94 NY2d 557 [2000]).

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Friedman, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered April 2, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of endangering the welfare of a child, and sentencing him to a conditional discharge for a period of one year and 50 hours of community service, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility, including its rejection of defendant’s incredible testimony, which was contradicted by the statements he made at the scene. Credible testimony from disinterested bystanders, along with medical evidence, established that defendant forcefully kicked a five-year-old child, causing him to fall against a wall. Defendant’s conduct created the type of risk to a child contemplated by the statute (Penal Law § 260.10 [1]). The fact that defendant was acquitted of the assault and attempted assault charges does not warrant a different conclusion (see People v Rayam, 94 NY2d 557 [2000]).

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Friedman, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.3d 288, 782 N.Y.S.2d 461, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11938, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-zeifman-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack