People v. Richardson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Richardson

126 A.D.2d 759, 511 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41914

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

DecidedJanuary 26, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 126 A.D.2d 759 (People v. Richardson) 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. Richardson, 126 A.D.2d 759, 511 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41914 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), rendered July 27, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was inculpated in the robbery of a supermarket by the testimony of two accomplices who were apprehended shortly after the robbery following a chase of their two cars by law enforcement officials. The defendant was apprehended several hours later. He repeatedly told a Deputy Sheriff that he knew nothing of any robbery and indicated to the Deputy and to a police officer that he had inadvertently been left on the parkway by friends. He later admitted that he was present in one of the cars parked outside the supermarket while the robbery was being committed, but continued to deny that he was involved in the robbery.

The defendant’s contention that the testimony of the accomplices was unsupported by corroborative evidence tending to connect him with the commission of the robbery (CPL 60.22) is without merit. There is ample evidence to corroborate the testimony of the accomplices, including the defendant’s admission establishing his presence at the very place and time of [760]*760the commission of the crime. Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), rendered July 27, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was inculpated in the robbery of a supermarket by the testimony of two accomplices who were apprehended shortly after the robbery following a chase of their two cars by law enforcement officials. The defendant was apprehended several hours later. He repeatedly told a Deputy Sheriff that he knew nothing of any robbery and indicated to the Deputy and to a police officer that he had inadvertently been left on the parkway by friends. He later admitted that he was present in one of the cars parked outside the supermarket while the robbery was being committed, but continued to deny that he was involved in the robbery.

The defendant’s contention that the testimony of the accomplices was unsupported by corroborative evidence tending to connect him with the commission of the robbery (CPL 60.22) is without merit. There is ample evidence to corroborate the testimony of the accomplices, including the defendant’s admission establishing his presence at the very place and time of [760]*760the commission of the crime. Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 A.D.2d 759, 511 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41914, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-richardson-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack