| People v Bowens |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 06536 [120 AD3d 1148] |
| September 30, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Ervin Bowens, Appellant. |
Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Robert S. Dean of counsel), forappellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Manu Balachandran of counsel),for respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Renee A. White, J.), renderedDecember 11, 2012, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted robbery in thesecond degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term ofseven years, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weightof the evidence (see People vDanielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury'sdeterminations concerning credibility. Defendant's accessorial liability could bereasonably inferred from the entire course of conduct of defendant and his codefendantbefore, during and after the crime, along with defendant's damaging admissions (seegenerally Matter of Juan J., 81 NY2d 739 [1992]; People v Allah, 71 NY2d830 [1988]).
The sentencing court properly adjudicated defendant a second violent felonyoffender. Not only was defendant's predicate felony (Penal Law§§ 110.00, 265.02 [4]) classified as a violent felony at the time of thatconviction in 2003 (see People v Walker, 81 NY2d 661, 664-666 [1993]), thesame crime remained a violent felony at the time of defendant's second violent felonyoffender adjudication, albeit as the result of a recodification (see Penal Law§ 265.03 [3]; [*2]William C. Donnino,Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 39, Penal Law§ 265.00 at 413). Defendant's ex post facto argument is without merit.Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels and Clark,JJ.