Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The People, etc., respondent, v. Alan DeCarlo, appellant.
Submitted—February 25, 2011
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hayes, J.), rendered April 6, 2009, convicting him of course of sexual conduct against a child in the second degree, criminal sexual act in the third degree, and endangering the welfare of a child, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of his right to effective assistance of counsel is, in part, based on matter dehors the record and to that extent, it may not be reviewed on direct appeal (see People v. Ramos, 77 AD3d 773). Insofar as the record permits review of the claim, we find that defense counsel provided meaningful representation (see People v. Turner, 5 NY3d 476, 480; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147).
The defendant's claim that his conviction of criminal sexual act in the third degree was not supported by legally sufficient evidence is not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 492; People v. Martin, 48 AD3d 701, 702). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of criminal sexual act in the third degree 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, 348–349), we nevertheless accord great deference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v. Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410, cert denied 542 U.S. 946; People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495). 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, 634–635).
MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, LOTT and COHEN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of the Court
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 2009–04282 (Ind.No. 65/08)
Decided: March 29, 2011
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)