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 of the State of New York, Respondent, v. William REYES, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard J. Fried, J.), rendered July 11, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of rape in the first degree and two counts of sexual abuse in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 18 years to run concurrently with two concurrent terms of 7 years, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including the weight to be given to the victim's background and the inconsistencies in her accounts of the incident, were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94, 68 N.E. 112 [1903] ). The inconsistencies cited by defendant were minor and readily capable of being reconciled.
The record establishes that defendant received effective assistance of counsel (see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 713-714, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584 [1998]; see also Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 [1984] ).
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.
By failing to object, or by making generalized objections (see e.g. People v. Harris, 98 N.Y.2d 452, 492, 749 N.Y.S.2d 766, 779 N.E.2d 705 [2002] ), defendant failed to preserve any of his present claims concerning various aspects of jury selection, the victim's testimony and the prosecutor's summation, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find no basis for reversal.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: April 19, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First 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.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
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)