People v. Byron J.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Byron J.

64 A.D.2d 639, 406 N.Y.S.2d 544, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12436

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

DecidedJuly 10, 1978

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 64 A.D.2d 639 (People v. Byron J.) 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. Byron J., 64 A.D.2d 639, 406 N.Y.S.2d 544, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12436 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered August 11, 1977, adjudicating him a youthful offender, upon his conviction of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law, indictment dismissed and case remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for the purpose of entering an order in its discretion pursuant to CPL 160.50. Under the facts of this case, assuming that the defendant was the youth who passed the complainant on her right side while the purse snatcher was passing to the left, the proof is insufficient to prove either that the defendant aided the thief or that he acted with the requisite intent (see Penal Law, § 20.00; People v La Belle, 18 NY2d 405; People v Campbell, 1 AD2d 982). Martuscello, J. P., Damiani, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered August 11, 1977, adjudicating him a youthful offender, upon his conviction of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law, indictment dismissed and case remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for the purpose of entering an order in its discretion pursuant to CPL 160.50. Under the facts of this case, assuming that the defendant was the youth who passed the complainant on her right side while the purse snatcher was passing to the left, the proof is insufficient to prove either that the defendant aided the thief or that he acted with the requisite intent (see Penal Law, § 20.00; People v La Belle, 18 NY2d 405; People v Campbell, 1 AD2d 982). Martuscello, J. P., Damiani, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 A.D.2d 639, 406 N.Y.S.2d 544, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12436, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-byron-j-nyappdiv-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack