People v. Samaroo

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (McKay, J.), rendered December 8, 2006, convicting him of resisting arrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction of resisting arrest is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484 [2008]; People v Moore, 36 AD3d 719 [2007]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it 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 [15]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), 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 [2004], cert

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit (see People v Wood, 40 AD3d 663 , 664 [2007]). Fisher, J.P., Florio, Dickerson and Belen, JJ., concur.