People v. Graziosa

Defendants present challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), the defendants conduct in "lung[ing]" at the complainant, punching him in the face, and attempting to kick him as he lay prone on the ground, was legally sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant assaulted the complainant without justification. To the extent that defendants proported legal sufficiency argument — impugning the complainants testimony as "inconsistent and highly unreliable" — is in reality a challenge to the conviction on weight of the evidence grounds, it is similarly lacking in merit. Issues of credibility were properly placed before the jury and we see no reason to disturb its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84,94 [1903]).