| People v Wilson |
| 2017 NY Slip Op 00673 [147 AD3d 793] |
| February 1, 2017 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Theodore Wilson, Appellant. |
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, NY (Mark W. Vorkink of counsel), for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (John M. Castellano, JohnnetteTraill, Joseph N. Ferdenzi, and Sharon Y. Brodt of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County(Blumenfeld, J.), rendered March 4, 2014, convicting him of assault in the first degree andassault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable tothe prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), the People adducedlegally sufficient evidence to support the defendant's conviction of assault in the first degreeunder Penal Law § 120.10 (3) beyond a reasonable doubt, as the evidence of thedefendant's conduct supported a finding of depraved indifference (see People v Suarez, 6 NY3d 202,212 [2005]; People v Nelligan, 135AD3d 1075, 1077-1078 [2016]; People v Nunez, 51 AD3d 1398, 1399 [2008]). Moreover, upon ourindependent review pursuant to CPL 470.15 (5), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was notagainst the weight of the evidence.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that the verdict isrepugnant (see People v Carter, 7NY3d 875, 876 [2006]; People vBrooks, 139 AD3d 1391, 1394 [2016]; People v Summerville, 138 AD3d 897, 898 [2016]). In any event,the verdict was not repugnant (seeMatter of Suarez v Byrne, 10 NY3d 523, 541 [2008]; People v Trappier, 87NY2d 55, 59 [1995]; Matter of ShalickM., 133 AD3d 413 [2015]).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit. Rivera, J.P., Roman, Duffy andBrathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.