The People, etc., respondent, v. Ricardo Joseph, appellant. (2014)

Submitted—January 14, 2014

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hayes, J.), rendered December 21, 2007, convicting him of assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see 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.   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. Romero, 7 NY3d 633).

The defendant's contention that the trial court erred in failing to provide a circumstantial evidence charge to the jury is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2];  People v. Clark, 100 AD3d 1013).   In any event, since the People's case against the defendant consisted of both direct and circumstantial evidence, he was not entitled to a circumstantial evidence charge (see People v. Daddona, 81 N.Y.2d 990, 992;  People v. Clark, 100 AD3d 1013;  People v. Davis, 83 AD3d 860, 861;  People v. Garson, 69 AD3d 650, 651–652).

The defendant's contention that reversal is required because of improper remarks made by the prosecutor during summation is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951, 953;  People v. Read, 97 AD3d 702;  People v. Adams, 93 AD3d 734;  People v. Gill, 54 AD3d 965, 966), and, in any event, without merit (see People v. Gopaul, 112 AD3d 966;  People v. Molinaro, 62 AD3d 724).

The defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel (see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712;  People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.

SKELOS, J.P., DILLON, HALL and ROMAN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court