People v. Chrisp

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Chrisp

194 A.D.2d 465, 599 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12880

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

DecidedJune 22, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 194 A.D.2d 465 (People v. Chrisp) 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. Chrisp, 194 A.D.2d 465, 599 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12880 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, III, J.), rendered May 2, 1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of one count of robbery in the first degree and two counts of robbery in the second degree and sentencing him to concurrent prison terms of 6 to 18 years on the first count and 5 to 15 years on the second and third counts, unanimously affirmed.

On June 2, 1990, the defendant and an accomplice forcibly [466]*466stole property from the victim while the defendant held a sharp object in the victim’s side. The defendant was quickly apprehended and a knife was recovered from his person. The indictment charged the defendant with committing the robbery while using or threatening the immediate use of a knife. The court charged the jury on the term "use” but not "threatened the immediate use”. On appeal, the defendant claims that the evidence did not establish that he used the knife to rob the victim. We disagree.

The evidence before the jury showed beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [3]; People v Pena, 50 NY2d 400, 407, n 2).

In the circumstances here present, the charge, to which no exception was taken, adequately conveyed the appropriate legal principles to the jury (People v Dekle, 56 NY2d 835). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Asch and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, III, J.), rendered May 2, 1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of one count of robbery in the first degree and two counts of robbery in the second degree and sentencing him to concurrent prison terms of 6 to 18 years on the first count and 5 to 15 years on the second and third counts, unanimously affirmed.

On June 2, 1990, the defendant and an accomplice forcibly [466]*466stole property from the victim while the defendant held a sharp object in the victim’s side. The defendant was quickly apprehended and a knife was recovered from his person. The indictment charged the defendant with committing the robbery while using or threatening the immediate use of a knife. The court charged the jury on the term "use” but not "threatened the immediate use”. On appeal, the defendant claims that the evidence did not establish that he used the knife to rob the victim. We disagree.

The evidence before the jury showed beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [3]; People v Pena, 50 NY2d 400, 407, n 2).

In the circumstances here present, the charge, to which no exception was taken, adequately conveyed the appropriate legal principles to the jury (People v Dekle, 56 NY2d 835). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Asch and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 A.D.2d 465, 599 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12880, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-chrisp-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack