Majority
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 the defendant’s guilt of two counts of robbery in the second degree (see Penal Law § 20.00; People v Carr-El, 287 AD2d 731 , 733 [2001], affd 99 NY2d 546 [2002]) and conspiracy in the fourth degree (see People v Ackies, 79 AD3d 1050 , 1056 [2010]) 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 [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 denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 , 495 [1987]). 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]). Skelos, J.P, Dickerson, Hall and Miller, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Contes 60 NY2d 620 at 621 p. 1072
- People v. Carr-El 287 AD2d 731 at 733 p. 1072
- People v. Carr-El 99 NY2d 546 p. 1072
- People v. Ackies 79 AD3d 1050 at 1056 p. 1072
- People v. Danielson 9 NY3d 342 p. 1072
- Middleton v. McNeil 542 US 946 p. 1072
- People v. Bleakley 69 NY2d 490 at 495 p. 1072
- People v. Romero 7 NY3d 633 p. 1072