Per Curiam
Shannon appealed from a judgment convicting him of second degree harassment. It was alleged Shannon struck his wife, thus also violated an order of protection. Shannon argued his wife was not a credible witness, and claimed the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, among other things. The court stated Shannon’s claims that his wife was unworthy of belief was one of legal sufficiency, but was unpreserved for appellate review. Also, it found the record did not support Shannon’s contention his wife’s alleged motives to lie and inconsistencies within her testimony rendered it “manifestly untrue.” The unanimous panel noted it could not be said the guilty verdict for harassment in the second degree was against the weight of the evidence. It found while the Criminal Court explicitly declined to accept all of wife’s testimony as truthful or accurate, it credited enough of the testimony, and that of other witnesses, as was necessary to establish the elements of charge—that Shannon struck his wife with the intent to harass, annoy or alarm her. The panel also did not find the Criminal Court improvidently exercised its discretion in precluding the defense from producing a caseworker as a witness to contradict wife’s trial testimony. Thus, it affirmed the conviction.
