| People v Booth |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 03211 [61 AD3d 1330] |
| April 24, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ryan M.Booth, Appellant. |
—[*1] R. Michael Tantillo, District Attorney, Canandaigua, for respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (Frederick G. Reed, J.), rendered May11, 2007. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of assault in the third degreeand criminal mischief in the fourth degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed, and thematter is remitted to Ontario County Court for proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of assault inthe third degree (Penal Law § 120.00 [1]) and criminal mischief in the fourth degree(§ 145.00 [1]), defendant contends that the conviction of criminal mischief is notsupported by legally sufficient evidence. By making only a general motion for a trial order ofdismissal, defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review (see People v Gray,86 NY2d 10, 19 [1995]). In any event, that contention lacks merit. "[W]here, as here, aperpetrator damages the very property used to assault his [or her] victim, he [or she] may bepresumed to intend the natural consequences of his [or her] acts and may thus be found guilty ofcriminal mischief" (Matter of CarlosM., 32 AD3d 686, 687 [2006]).
We reject the further contention of defendant that he was subjected to a de facto arrestwithout probable cause when he was detained by the police and that County Court erred inrefusing to suppress the fruits of that alleged arrest. Contrary to the contention of defendant, hewas not subjected to a de facto arrest before the showup identification by the victim, but insteadwas merely detained. Indeed, in conducting the showup identification, "the police diligentlypursued a minimally intrusive means of investigation likely to confirm or dispel suspicionquickly, during which time it was necessary to detain the defendant" (People v Hicks, 68NY2d 234, 242 [1986]; see People vOwens, 39 AD3d 1260, 1261 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 849 [2007]).Present—Smith, J.P., Centra, Fahey, Green and Pine, JJ.