People v. Hamlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hamlin

256 A.D.2d 53, 682 N.Y.S.2d 134, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13036

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

DecidedDecember 3, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.D.2d 53 (People v. Hamlin) 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. Hamlin, 256 A.D.2d 53, 682 N.Y.S.2d 134, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13036 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ira Globerman, J.), rendered May 31, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The evidence was legally sufficient to prove defendant’s guilt of both counts of second-degree robbery and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence that defendant and the codefendant shared a community of purpose, including defendant’s actions of blocking the complainant and picking up his property (People v Patton, 184 AD2d 483; People v Robinson, 127 AD2d 860).

The totality of the charge reveals that the court conveyed the proper standard with respect to defendant’s required mental state for accomplice liability, and we reject defendant’s argument that the charge imposed upon the People an additional, [54]*54unmet burden of proof. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ira Globerman, J.), rendered May 31, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The evidence was legally sufficient to prove defendant’s guilt of both counts of second-degree robbery and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence that defendant and the codefendant shared a community of purpose, including defendant’s actions of blocking the complainant and picking up his property (People v Patton, 184 AD2d 483; People v Robinson, 127 AD2d 860).

The totality of the charge reveals that the court conveyed the proper standard with respect to defendant’s required mental state for accomplice liability, and we reject defendant’s argument that the charge imposed upon the People an additional, [54]*54unmet burden of proof. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D.2d 53, 682 N.Y.S.2d 134, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13036, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hamlin-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack