The People, etc., respondent, v. Johnie Bonds, appellant. (2011)

Submitted—May 23, 2011

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Hudson, J.), rendered October 10, 2008, convicting him of criminal trespass in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05;  People v. Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 491–492;  People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19–20).   In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see generally Matter of Jeffrey M., 309 A.D.2d 937, 938;  cf.  Matter of Paul N., 244 A.D.2d 489, 490).

Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15[5];  People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v. Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410, cert denied 542 U.S. 946;  People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495).   Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342;  People v. Romero, 7 NY3d 633).

The defendant further contends that he was deprived of a fair trial by the prosecutor's tactic of asking him on cross-examination whether he believed two of the prosecution's police witnesses were lying.   Although we have repeatedly disapproved of this type of questioning (see e.g. People v. Berrios, 298 A.D.2d 597, 597;  People v. Webb, 68 A.D.2d 331, 333;  People v. Yant, 75 A.D.2d 653, 653), any error committed here was harmless as there was overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt and no significant probability that the impropriety in the prosecutor's cross-examination affected the verdict (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 241–242;  People v. Gonzalez, 15 AD3d 594, 594–595;  People v. Lawrence, 4 AD3d 436, 437;  People v. McGlone, 222 A.D.2d 529, 529;  People v. Calada, 154 A.D.2d 700, 700).

COVELLO, J.P., LEVENTHAL, LOTT and MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Matthew G. Kiernan

Clerk of the Court