| People v Antoine (William) |
| 2015 NY Slip Op 51565(U) [49 Misc 3d 138(A)] |
| Decided on October 21, 2015 |
| Appellate Term, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Appeal from four judgments of the District Court of Nassau County, Nassau County Traffic and Parking Violations Agency (Allen S. Mathers, J.H.O.), rendered December 20, 2013. The judgments, after a nonjury trial, convicted defendant of failing to stop at a stop sign and two charges of failing to signal before turning, and, upon his plea of guilty, excessively tinted windows, respectively.
ORDERED that the judgments of conviction are affirmed.
Following a nonjury trial, defendant was convicted of failing to stop at a stop sign (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1172 [a]) and two charges of failing to signal before turning (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1163 [a]). He also pleaded guilty to having excessively tinted windows (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 375 [12-a] [b] [2]).
In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we accord great deference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear their testimony, observe their demeanor and assess their credibility (see People v Lane, 7 NY3d 888, 890 [2006]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). As defendant gave a different account of the events from that presented by the complaining police officer, the issue presented is primarily one of credibility (see People v Yeroushalmi, 47 Misc 3d 154[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 50821[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2015]). Upon a review of the record, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). Furthermore, as to the conviction of having excessively tinted windows, defendant pleaded guilty to that charge and, therefore, his conviction rests on the sufficiency of his plea, which he is not challenging, and not the legal sufficiency of the evidence, as a defendant may not seek a review of issues of factual guilt following his admission of factual guilt (see People v Torres, 171 AD2d 825 [1991]).
Accordingly, the judgments of conviction are affirmed.
Marano, P.J., Garguilo and Connolly, JJ., concur.