PEOPLE v. BERMUDEZ (2007)

 Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a nonjury trial of assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10 [1] ).   We agree with defendant that County Court erred in admitting evidence of an uncharged crime without conducting a Ventimiglia hearing.   We conclude, however, that the error is harmless (see generally People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 241-242, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213, 326 N.E.2d 787).   Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the People improperly impeached their own witness (see People v. Picente, 35 A.D.3d 1210, 1211, 825 N.Y.S.2d 629;  People v. Willis, 303 A.D.2d 936, 756 N.Y.S.2d 698, lv. denied 100 N.Y.2d 544, 763 N.Y.S.2d 10, 793 N.E.2d 424), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15[6][a] ).   We reject defendant's further contention that the verdict is 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).   The court's resolution of credibility issues is entitled to great deference, and it cannot be said that the court failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded (see People v. Lane, 7 N.Y.3d 888, 826 N.Y.S.2d 599, 860 N.E.2d 61;  People v. Britt, 298 A.D.2d 984, 748 N.Y.S.2d 297, lv. denied 99 N.Y.2d 556, 754 N.Y.S.2d 208, 784 N.E.2d 81).   Contrary to the further contention of defendant, he received effective assistance of counsel (see generally People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).   Defense counsel “made appropriate and comprehensive pretrial motions, conducted pretrial hearings and examination of witnesses at the trial, [and] made timely and appropriate objections and attacks on the People's proof” (People v. Fells, 279 A.D.2d 706, 711, 718 N.Y.S.2d 458, lv. denied 96 N.Y.2d 758, 725 N.Y.S.2d 284, 748 N.E.2d 1080), and defense counsel's decision not to call certain witnesses to testify was a matter of strategy (see People v. Botting, 8 A.D.3d 1064, 1066, 778 N.Y.S.2d 824, lv. denied 3 N.Y.3d 671, 784 N.Y.S.2d 9, 817 N.E.2d 827;  see generally People v. Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 708-709, 530 N.Y.S.2d 52, 525 N.E.2d 698).   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: