PEOPLE v. EICHELE (1999)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J.), rendered May 29, 1997, convicting him of criminal contempt in the first degree and criminal contempt in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

 The defendant's contention that his conviction of criminal contempt in the first degree is inconsistent with his acquittal of the charges of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and menacing in the second degree is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05[2];  People v. Satloff, 56 N.Y.2d 745, 746, 452 N.Y.S.2d 12, 437 N.E.2d 271;  People v. Irving, 151 A.D.2d 605, 606, 542 N.Y.S.2d 693).   Similarly, the defendant's contention that his guilt of criminal contempt in the first degree was not proven by legally sufficient evidence because the People failed to establish that he placed the victim in fear of physical injury is also unpreserved for appellate review, since it “was not advanced with specificity before the trial court in support of [his] motion to dismiss made at the close of the People's case” (People v. Williams, 187 A.D.2d 547, 589 N.Y.S.2d 604).

 In any event, in view of the elements of each crime as charged to the jury, the defendant's acquittal on the weapon possession and menacing counts did not necessarily negate the finding that the defendant intentionally placed the victim in reasonable fear of physical injury, serious physical injury, or death by means of a threat, when he violated a restraining order by visiting the victim at her place of employment and, among other things, threatened to kill her (see, People v. Trappier, 87 N.Y.2d 55, 637 N.Y.S.2d 352, 660 N.E.2d 1131;  People v. Goodfriend, 64 N.Y.2d 695, 485 N.Y.S.2d 519, 474 N.E.2d 1187;  People v. Tucker, 55 N.Y.2d 1, 6, 447 N.Y.S.2d 132, 431 N.E.2d 617;  People v. Abi-Zeid, 178 A.D.2d 604, 578 N.Y.S.2d 844;  People v. Alfaro, 108 A.D.2d 517, 489 N.Y.S.2d 546, affd. 66 N.Y.2d 985, 499 N.Y.S.2d 378, 489 N.E.2d 1280).   Moreover, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.