| People v Brown |
| 2021 NY Slip Op 03970 |
| Decided on June 17, 2021 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth 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 June 17, 2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND WINSLOW, JJ.
625 KA 19-01451
v
VLADIMIR BROWN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (J. SCOTT PORTER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (BRADLEY W. OASTLER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Thomas J. Miller, J.), rendered March 8, 2019. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts), concealment of a human corpse and tampering with physical evidence.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [1] [b]; [3]), one count of concealment of a human corpse (§ 195.02), and one count of tampering with physical evidence (§ 215.40 [2]). We affirm.
Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crimes as charged to the jury (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant's contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Contrary to defendant's further contention, County Court legally imposed consecutive sentences on the count of concealment of a human corpse and the count of tampering with physical evidence (see generally People v Couser, 28 NY3d 368, 376 [2016]). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to exercise our power to review them as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [3] [c]).
Entered: June 17, 2021
Mark W. Bennett
Clerk of the Court