Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Deborah Kaplan, J.), rendered January l7, 2006, after a jury trial, convicting him of aggravated harassment in the second degree and harassment in the second degree, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Deborah Kaplan, J.), rendered January l7, 2006, affirmed.

The verdict was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury's credibility determinations. The jury, which listened to defendant's threatening and abusive telephone messages, rationally could conclude that the messages were actuated by the requisite criminal intent and were made "in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm" (Penal §240.30[1]). The vile and vitriolic messages, which defendant left on the complainant's personal, office voice mail, did not constitute constitutionally protected speech (see People v Shack, 86 NY2d 529 [1995]; compare People v Mangano, 100 NY2d 569 [2003]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: December 22, 2008