People v. DufrensePeople v. Dufrense
The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning identification and credibility (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). The evidence which, among other things, linked defendant to the theft of the victim’s credit cards, supported the conclusion that he knowingly possessed them, and excluded any reasonable hypothesis of innocence beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact that the jury acquitted defendant of grand larceny does not warrant a different conclusion (see People v Rayam, 94 NY2d 557 [2000]; People v Williams, 239 AD2d 271 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 899 [1997]).
Defendant’s claim regarding the imposition of a mandatory surcharge and fees is unpreserved and unavailing (see People v Lemos, 34 AD3d 343 [2006]). Concur—Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Marlow, Buckley and Sweeny, JJ.