People v. Alford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Alford

127 A.D.2d 668, 512 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43153

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 9, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 127 A.D.2d 668 (People v. Alford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Alford, 127 A.D.2d 668, 512 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43153 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Linakis, J.), rendered May 24, 1985, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The issue of the adequacy of the court’s charge on accomplice liability is unpreserved for appellate review since no objection or protest was made thereto at the trial (see, People v Nuccie, 57 NY2d 818). In any event, viewing the charge as a whole, the jury could discern the correct rules to apply (see, People v Canty, 60 NY2d 830) and the proof of guilt was overwhelming. Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Brown and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Linakis, J.), rendered May 24, 1985, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The issue of the adequacy of the court’s charge on accomplice liability is unpreserved for appellate review since no objection or protest was made thereto at the trial (see, People v Nuccie, 57 NY2d 818). In any event, viewing the charge as a whole, the jury could discern the correct rules to apply (see, People v Canty, 60 NY2d 830) and the proof of guilt was overwhelming. Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Brown and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 A.D.2d 668, 512 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-alford-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack