The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury's determinations concerning credibility. There was ample evidence from which the jury could have reasonably inferred defendant's intent to defraud the customers of the "boiler-room" operation he directed and to permanently deprive them of their investment money, as well as ample evidence establishing the element of reliance by the customers.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.