PEOPLE v. BHARDWAJ (2022)

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of criminal mischief in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 145.00 [1]).

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, 348-349 [2007]), we accord great deference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear their testimony, observe their demeanor and assess their credibility (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Weight of the evidence review requires that the reviewing court determine if an acquittal would not have been unreasonable, and, if so, the court must weigh the conflicting testimony, review any rational inferences that may be drawn from the evidence, and evaluate the strength of such conclusions, to determine whether the trier of fact was justified in finding the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d at 348; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 495). Contrary to defendant's contention, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 643-644 [2006]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 493).

Defendant's contention that he was deprived of a fair trial by the court's failure to give the jury a missing witness charge is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to reach the issue.

Defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

ALIOTTA, P.J., WESTON and TOUSSAINT, JJ., concur.