People v. Hough

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Spergel, J.), rendered December 12, 2013, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the facts and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and a new trial is ordered.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 , 621 [1983]), and giving it the benefit of every reasonable inference which could be drawn from the circumstantial evidence adduced (see People v Lewis, 64 NY2d 1111 , 1112 [1985]), we find that the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, 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 , 348 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383 , 410 [2004]). 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 [2006]).

However, as we held on the appeal of the defendant’s codefendant, the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion discharging a sworn juror (see People v Owens, 136 AD3d 841 [2016]). As such, a new trial must be ordered.

Mastro, J.P., Dickerson, Hall and Sgroi, JJ., concur.