The People of the State of New York, Ind. C/ Respondent, v. Eddie Irizarri, Defendant–Appellant.

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

The People of the State of New York, Ind. C/ Respondent, v. Eddie Irizarri, Defendant–Appellant.

4646 2053 8 05

Decided: March 29, 2011

Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Catterson, Acosta, Manzanet–Daniels, JJ. Richard M. Greenberg, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Rosemary Herbert of counsel), for appellant. Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Nancy D. Killian of counsel), for respondent.

_

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, (Barbara F. Newman, J.), rendered January 24, 2007, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of endangering the welfare of a child, and sentencing him to a term of 10 months. unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348–349 [2007] ).   There is no basis for disturbing the jury's credibility determinations.   In performing weight of evidence review, we may consider the jury's verdict on other counts (see People v. Rayam, 94 N.Y.2d 557, 563 n [2000] ).   Nevertheless, we find that the jury's mixed verdict does not warrant a different result.  “Where a jury verdict is not repugnant, it is imprudent to speculate concerning the factual determinations that underlay the verdict because what might appear to be an irrational verdict may actually constitute a jury's permissible exercise of mercy or leniency” (People v. Horne, 97 N.Y.2d 404, 413 [2002];  see also People v. Hemmings, 2 NY3d 1, 7 n [2004] ).   Moreover, aside from considerations of

leniency, the jury could have found that the victim's testimony was corroborated as to the child endangerment count but not as to the other charges.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

_

CLERK