PEOPLE v. ALBA (2026)

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Heidi Cesare, J.), rendered May 3, 2024, convicting him of assault in the third degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was charged with assault in the third degree and related crimes arising out of a physical altercation with an Uber driver in Brooklyn in 2021.  After a nonjury trial, the defendant was convicted of assault in the third degree.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to disprove the defendant's justification defense and to establish the defendant's guilt of assault in the third degree beyond a reasonable doubt (see Penal Law § 120.00[1];  People v. Casey, 200 A.D.3d 1002, 1002, 155 N.Y.S.3d 786).  Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence pursuant to CPL 470.15(5), we nevertheless accord great deference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v. Mateo, 2 N.Y.3d 383, 410, 779 N.Y.S.2d 399, 811 N.E.2d 1053;  People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672).  “[T]he appropriate standard for evaluating [a] weight of the evidence argument is the same, regardless of whether the factfinder was a judge or jury” (People v. Rojas, 80 A.D.3d 782, 782, 915 N.Y.S.2d 602 [internal quotation marks omitted];  see People v. King, 85 A.D.3d 820, 821, 925 N.Y.S.2d 561).  Upon our review of the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Romero, 7 N.Y.3d 633, 643, 826 N.Y.S.2d 163, 859 N.E.2d 902).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.

DUFFY, J.P., FORD, LANDICINO and GOLDBERG VELAZQUEZ, JJ., concur.