People v. Dennis

146 A.D.2d 708, 537 N.Y.S.2d 204, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 606
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 23, 1989
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 146 A.D.2d 708 (People v. Dennis) 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. Dennis, 146 A.D.2d 708, 537 N.Y.S.2d 204, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 606 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Demakos, J.), rendered April 8, 1987, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, we find that the evidence was legally sufficient to establish that the driver of the getaway car was "another person actually present” so as to support a conviction for robbery in the second degree as defined in Penal Law § 160.10 (1). The record reveals that the complaining witness was robbed of her purse, on the street, in full view of the driver, who was in a position to render immediate assistance to the defendant (cf., People v Hedgeman, 70 NY2d 533). Accordingly, the driver’s presence posed a sufficient threat of additional violence so as to satisfy the aggravating element necessary to raise the offense to second degree robbery.

[709]*709While we agree with the defendant that the trial court should have instructed the jury with respect to the issue of corroboration of the testimony of an accomplice (see, CPL 60.22 [1]), the court’s failure to do so does not warrant reversal of the conviction, since there was ample corroborative evidence, elicited from the complainant, which connected the defendant to the commission of the crime (see, People v Mayo, 136 AD2d 748, lv denied 71 NY2d 971).

Finally, the defendant’s challenges to various comments made by the prosecutor during summation are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, J. P., Thompson, Kunzeman and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Marquez
298 A.D.2d 407 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
People v. Carr-El
287 A.D.2d 731 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
People v. Washington
283 A.D.2d 661 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
People v. Stokes
278 A.D.2d 18 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
People v. Vladimir S. F.
238 A.D.2d 438 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
People v. Letterlough
203 A.D.2d 589 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
People v. Mills
198 A.D.2d 236 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
People v. Wright
189 A.D.2d 612 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
People v. Wilkerson
189 A.D.2d 592 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
People v. Patton
184 A.D.2d 483 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Rivera
184 A.D.2d 288 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Charles
168 A.D.2d 339 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. White
167 A.D.2d 246 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Moses
162 A.D.2d 311 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Proilio
156 A.D.2d 386 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
People v. Velez
155 A.D.2d 365 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
146 A.D.2d 708, 537 N.Y.S.2d 204, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 606, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dennis-nyappdiv-1989.