People v Yarborough (2014 NY Slip Op 04972)
People v Yarborough
2014 NY Slip Op 04972
Decided on July 2, 2014
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Decided on July 2, 2014SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAppellate Division, Second Judicial DepartmentPETER B. SKELOS, J.P.
PLUMMER E. LOTT
SHERI S. ROMAN
HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.


2012-07395
 (Ind. No. 1643/11)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent, 
vAndre Yarborough, appellant.
Arza R. Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y. (Steven A. Feldman of counsel), for appellant.
Kathleen M. Rice, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Judith R. Sternberg and Barbara Kornblau of counsel), for respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Robbins, J.), rendered July 24, 2012, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree (two counts), and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt as to the crimes of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree and petit larceny beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15[5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt as to these crimes was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633).
The defendant has failed to establish that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
SKELOS, J.P., LOTT, ROMAN and LASALLE, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court


