| People v Beverly |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 04880 [74 AD3d 1480] |
| June 10, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v AlbertBeverly, Appellant. |
—[*1]
Lahtinen, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Breslin, J.),rendered June 13, 2006, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of criminal possessionof a weapon in the fourth degree, resisting arrest and menacing in the second degree.
In October 2005, defendant contacted the City of Albany Police Department and stated thathe was going to harm himself and a certain woman. The responding officers were involved in atwo to three-hour standoff with defendant as he, among other things, brandished a knife, threwvarious items at them and repeatedly threatened the officers. He was eventually subdued by ataser and, thereafter, charged in a five-count indictment. A jury convicted him of three counts, allmisdemeanors—criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, resisting arrest andmenacing in the second degree. Defendant appeals, arguing that the verdict was against theweight of the evidence.
Since a different verdict would not have been unreasonable, we must "like the trier of factbelow, weigh the relative probative force of conflicting testimony and the relative strength ofconflicting inferences that may be drawn from the testimony" (People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633,643 [2006] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see People v Bleakley, 69NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Here, police officers testified that defendant wielded a knife describedas[*2]"butcher-size" with an estimated eight-inch blade. Therewas evidence that defendant stated that he would use the knife against anyone who came afterhim and, with the knife in his hand, he told officers at his apartment door that he would kill themif they entered. He then attempted to barricade himself in the second floor apartment. Whenofficers eventually entered the apartment, he refused an officer's order to drop the knife andinstead challenged the officer to "bring it on."
While defendant offered some evidence challenging certain elements of the crimes, reviewof the record reveals ample proof of each of the crimes of which defendant was convicted. Afterweighing the evidence and according deference as to the jury's credibility determinations (seePeople v Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 495; People v Jackson, 38 AD3d 1052, 1054 [2007], lv denied 8NY3d 986 [2007]), we are unpersuaded that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.
Mercure, J.P., Spain, Malone Jr. and Kavanagh, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.