| People v Winfield |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 05159 [63 AD3d 969] |
| June 16, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Savannah Winfield, Appellant. |
—[*1] Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Rosalind Gray of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Hinrichs,J.), rendered March 19, 2007, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (three counts), upon ajury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Although the testimony of a correction officer in this case was not relevant since there wasno evidence linking the money discovered by that correction officer in the defendant's possessionsix days after his arrest to the money taken during the robbery in question (see People vPrimo, 96 NY2d 351, 355 [2001]), the error in admitting that testimony was harmless sincethe proof of the defendant's guilt was overwhelming and there was no significant probability thatthe jury would have acquitted the defendant had it not been for that testimony (see People vCrimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242 [1975]; see also People v Paulman, 5 NY3d 122,134 [2005]; People v Payne, 41 AD3d 512, 514 [2007]).
In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of theevidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), wenevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear thetestimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], certdenied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Uponreviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight ofthe evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, Penal Law § 70.08, New York's persistentviolent felony offender statute pursuant to which the defendant was sentenced, is notunconstitutional (see People v Crowder, 47 AD3d 724 [2008]; People vHammon, 47 AD3d 644, 645 [2008]; see also People v Rivera, 5 NY3d 61, 80[2005], cert denied 546 US 984 [2005]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80, 83[1982]). Mastro, J.P., Dillon, Santucci and Balkin, JJ., concur.