People v. Morson

42 A.D.3d 505, 839 N.Y.S.2d 229
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 17, 2007
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 42 A.D.3d 505 (People v. Morson) 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. Morson, 42 A.D.3d 505, 839 N.Y.S.2d 229 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

[506]*506Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (McGuire, J.), rendered April 26, 2005, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court correctly denied the defendant’s request to instruct the jury on the affirmative defense of duress (see Penal Law § 40.00), because even when viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant, no reasonable view of the evidence supported such a defense (see People v Butts, 72 NY2d 746, 750 [1988]; People v Watts, 57 NY2d 299, 301 [1982]). Contrary to the defendant’s contention, no reasonable view of the evidence supported a finding that he was subjected to “the use or threatened imminent use of unlawful physical force upon him” (Penal Law § 40.00 [1]; see People v Hai Guang Zheng, 268 AD2d 443, 444 [2000]; People v Brown, 68 AD2d 503, 512-513 [1979]). Furthermore, the evidence clearly established that the defendant voluntarily put himself into a position where he could be subjected to any alleged duress (see Penal Law § 40.00 [2]; People v Amato, 99 AD2d 495, 496 [1984]).

The defendant’s contention regarding the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction of one of the two counts of robbery in the second degree is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19-21 [1995]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Schmidt, J.E, Goldstein, Covello and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Jackson
2019 NY Slip Op 3365 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Fraser
134 A.D.3d 734 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
NAFI, EZEIEKILE, PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015
People v. Nafi
132 A.D.3d 1301 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
People v. Dunlap
51 A.D.3d 943 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
42 A.D.3d 505, 839 N.Y.S.2d 229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-morson-nyappdiv-2007.