PEOPLE v. RIDEOUT (2024)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of two counts of tampering with physical evidence (Penal Law § 215.40 [2]). Contrary to defendant's contention, we conclude that the indictment and bill of particulars provided defendant with “fair notice of the accusations made against him, so that he [was] able to prepare a defense” (People v. Iannone, 45 N.Y.2d 589, 594, 412 N.Y.S.2d 110, 384 N.E.2d 656 [1978]; see People v. Schulz, 32 A.D.3d 1224, 1224, 821 N.Y.S.2d 346 [4th Dept. 2006]; see generally People v. Morris, 61 N.Y.2d 290, 293-296, 473 N.Y.S.2d 769, 461 N.E.2d 1256 [1984]). Contrary to defendant's further contention, we conclude that the circumstantial evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the People (see People v. Hines, 97 N.Y.2d 56, 62, 736 N.Y.S.2d 643, 762 N.E.2d 329 [2001], rearg denied 97 N.Y.2d 678, 738 N.Y.S.2d 292, 764 N.E.2d 396 [2001]), is legally sufficient to support the conviction (see People v. Neulander, 221 A.D.3d 1412, 1412-1413, 200 N.Y.S.3d 583 [4th Dept. 2023], lv denied 41 N.Y.3d 984, 210 N.Y.S.3d 746, 234 N.E.3d 362 [2024]; People v. Maull, 167 A.D.3d 1465, 1466, 90 N.Y.S.3d 412 [4th Dept. 2018], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 951, 100 N.Y.S.3d 185, 123 N.E.3d 844 [2019]). Finally, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crimes as charged to the jury (see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007]), we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672 [1987]).