THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. JAMIE TACKLEY DEFENDANT APPELLANT

Reset A A Font size: Print

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

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. JAMIE R. TACKLEY, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.

KA 08–02208

Decided: June 14, 2013

PRESENT:  SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, FAHEY, CARNI, AND LINDLEY, JJ. TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (TIMOTHY S. DAVIS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (NANCY GILLIGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:  On appeal from a judgment convicting him following a nonjury trial of, inter alia, criminal mischief in the second degree (Penal Law § 145.10), defendant contends that the verdict with respect to that crime is against the weight of the evidence.   We reject that contention.   Based on our independent review of the evidence, we conclude that a different verdict would have been unreasonable (see People v. Peters, 90 AD3d 1507, 1508, lv denied 18 NY3d 996;  see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495).   Even assuming, arguendo, that a different verdict would not have been unreasonable, we further conclude that “[County Court] was in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses and, on this record, it cannot be said that the [court] failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded” (People v. Orta, 12 AD3d 1147, 1147, lv denied 4 NY3d 801;  see People v. Clarke, 101 AD3d 1646, 1647, lv denied 20 NY3d 1097).

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court