People v Cureton
2013 NY Slip Op 02976 [105 AD3d 1457]
April 26, 2013
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
As corrected through Wednesday, May 29, 2013


The People of the State of New York, Respondent, vMichael Cureton, Appellant.

[*1]The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Sherry A. Chase of counsel),for defendant-appellant.

Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (David Panepinto of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Thomas P. Franczyk, J.),rendered May 23, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, after a nonjury verdict, ofunlawful imprisonment in the second degree and criminal contempt in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him following a nonjury trialof, inter alia, unlawful imprisonment in the second degree (Penal Law § 135.05),defendant contends that the verdict with respect to that crime is against the weight of theevidence. Although we agree with defendant that "an acquittal would not have beenunreasonable," we conclude that, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of thecrime in this nonjury trial, "[b]ased on the weight of the credible evidence. . . [County Court] was justified in finding the defendant guilty beyond areasonable doubt" (People vDanielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348 [2007]). The court was entitled to resolvecredibility issues against defendant (see People v Cuthrell, 13 AD3d 1224, 1225 [2004], lvdenied 4 NY3d 885 [2005]), and to reject his version of the events (see People v McCoy, 100AD3d 1422, 1422 [2012]). "[U]pon our review of the record, we cannot say that thecourt failed to give the evidence the weight that it should be accorded" (People vBritt, 298 AD2d 984, 984 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 556 [2002]). Finally,defendant's challenge to the legality of the sentence of probation imposed on theunlawful imprisonment count has been rendered moot as a result of the revocation of hissentence of probation (see generally People v Meli, 142 AD2d 938, 939 [1988],lv denied 72 NY2d 921 [1988]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Peradotto,Sconiers, Valentino and Martoche, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.