PEOPLE v. PEARSON (2006)

 Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her, after a nonjury trial, of perjury in the first degree (Penal Law § 210.15).   Defendant failed to renew her challenge to the alleged legal insufficiency of the evidence after she presented a defense and thus failed to preserve for our review her contention that the conviction is not supported by legally sufficient evidence (see People v. Hines, 97 N.Y.2d 56, 61, 736 N.Y.S.2d 643, 762 N.E.2d 329, rearg. denied 97 N.Y.2d 678, 738 N.Y.S.2d 292, 764 N.E.2d 396;  People v. Williams, 17 A.D.3d 1043, 1045, 794 N.Y.S.2d 197, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 811, 803 N.Y.S.2d 40, 836 N.E.2d 1163).   In any event, the evidence is legally sufficient to establish each element of the crime (see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672), i.e., that defendant intentionally made a false statement that she did not believe to be true (see § 210.00[5] ), and that the statement consisted of sworn testimony that was material to the proceeding in which it was made (see § 210.15).   We further conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d at 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672).   Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: