44 Misc 3d 137(A)
N.Y. App. Term 2nd
2014

People v Builder (Emperor)

2011-2629 K CR

Appellate Term, Second Department

August 5, 2014

2014 NY Slip Op 51251(U) | 44 Misc 3d 137(A)

WESTON, J.P., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ.

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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : WESTON, J.P., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ.

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, against Emperor Builder, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Michael Gerstein, J.), rendered July 29, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of attempted criminal mischief in the fourth degree.

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that, contrary to defendant‘s contention, the evidence was legally sufficient to establish defendant‘s guilt of attempted criminal mischief in the fourth degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 145.00 [1]). The proof adduced at trial established, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant had intentionally (Penal Law § 15.05 [1] [“A person acts intentionally with respect to a result . . . when his conscious objective is to cause such result“]) attempted to damage the property of another. The element of intent is “rarely proved by an explicit expression of culpability by the perpetrator; and [c]ompeting inferences to be drawn [regarding defendant‘s intent], if not unreasonable, are within the exclusive domain of the finder of fact” (People v Bueno, 18 NY3d 160, 169 [2011] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see People v Steinberg, 79 NY2d 673, 684-685 [1992]; People v Barnes, 50 NY2d 375, 381 [1980]). In the exercise of our factual review power (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we find defendant‘s contention, that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]), to be without merit.

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Weston, J.P., Aliotta and Elliot, JJ., concur.

Decision Date: August 05, 2014