Majority
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Knopf, J), rendered March 25, 2008, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree pursuant to Penal Law § 165.50 (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484 , 492-493 [2008]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 ,19-20 [1995]; People v Williams, 38 AD3d 925 , 925-926 [2007]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 , 621 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish that the defendant knowingly possessed stolen property (see People v Cintron, 95 NY2d 329 , 332 [2000]; People v Zorcik, 67 NY2d 670 , 671 [1986]; People v Derrell, 6 AD3d 625 , 626 [2004]), and that the value of the property exceeded $3,000 (see People v Bravo, 295 AD2d 213 , 214 [2002]; cf. People v Womble, 111 AD2d 283 , 283-284 [1985]). Further, upon our independent review of the evidence pursuant to CPL 470.15 (5), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]; People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). Rivera, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and Sgroi, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Porco 71 AD3d 791 at 794 p. 558
- People v. Hawkins 11 NY3d 484 at 492-493 p. 558
- People v. Gray 86 NY2d 10 at 19-20 p. 558
- People v. Williams 38 AD3d 925 at 925-926 p. 558
- People v. Contes 60 NY2d 620 at 621 p. 558
- People v. Cintron 95 NY2d 329 at 332 p. 558
- People v. Zorcik 67 NY2d 670 at 671 p. 558
- People v. Bravo 295 AD2d 213 at 214 p. 558
- People v. Womble 111 AD2d 283 at 283-284 p. 558
- People v. Danielson 9 NY3d 342 p. 558
- People v. Romero 7 NY3d 633 p. 558