| People v Wofford |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 06966 [66 AD3d 1404] |
| October 2, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Mawahi D.Wofford, Appellant. |
—[*1] Michael C. Green, District Attorney, Rochester (Patrick H. Fierro of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Joseph D. Valentino, J.),rendered July 17, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of burglary inthe second degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, ofburglary in the second degree (Penal Law § 140.25 [2]), arising from an incident in whichhe entered an apartment and stole property. Defendant contends that the conviction is notsupported by legally sufficient evidence because the fingerprint identification evidence, whichwas the sole direct proof identifying him as the perpetrator, did not establish that he entered theapartment on the specific date charged in the indictment. We reject that contention. Viewing theevidence in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620,621 [1983]), we conclude that there is a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences thatcould lead a rational person to the conclusion reached by the jury based on the evidence at trial(see generally People v Danielson,9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Based onthe testimony of tenants in the apartment building where the victim resided, a rational juror couldhave found that defendant's fingerprints found on one of the bedroom windows and a bowl fromwhich personal property was taken were left by the perpetrator on the date specified in theindictment. Present—Scudder, P.J., Martoche, Peradotto, Carni and Gorski, JJ.