| People v Pedroso |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 00543 [69 AD3d 883] |
| January 19, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Adalberto Pedroso, Appellant. |
—[*1] Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Goshen, N.Y. (Elizabeth L. Guinup and Andrew R.Kass of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J),rendered September 28, 2007, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in thethird degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, unlawful fleeing a policeofficer in a motor vehicle in the third degree, and reckless driving in violation of Vehicle andTraffic Law § 1212, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's convictions arise out of his possession of a stolen trailer and its contents,and his reckless driving and failure to stop the vehicle when so directed by the police.
The defendant's contention that there was legally insufficient evidence to establish, beyond areasonable doubt, that he knowingly possessed stolen property, as required to prove criminalpossession of stolen property in the third and fifth degrees (see Penal Law§§ 165.50, 165.40), or that he committed unlawful fleeing a police officer andreckless driving, is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 492 [2008]). In any event,viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Cabey, 85NY2d 417, 420 [1995]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guiltbeyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15 (5),we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d342 [2007]; People v Romero,7 NY3d 633 [2006]; People vHart, 26 AD3d 836 [2006]). The evidence that the defendant was observed in exclusivepossession of the stolen property, failed to stop when directed to do so by the police, and thenfailed to decelerate before passing a stationary police roadblock, was sufficient to establish therequisite culpable mental state (see People v Cintron, 95 NY2d 329, 332 [2000]), and theelements of unlawful fleeing of a police officer in a motor vehicle in the third degree(see Penal Law § 270.25) and reckless driving (see Vehicle and TrafficLaw § 1212).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80, 86[1982]).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit. Fisher, J.P., Miller, Eng and Hall, JJ.,concur.