People v. Tucker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tucker

130 A.D.2d 605, 515 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 46619

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

DecidedMay 11, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 130 A.D.2d 605 (People v. Tucker) 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. Tucker, 130 A.D.2d 605, 515 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 46619 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.), rendered December 9, 1985, convicting him of grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, having observed a larceny while it was in progress and having assisted the perpetrator' to complete that larceny, is liable as an accomplice to the larceny (see, People v Robinson, 60 NY2d 982, 984). Moreover, the jury could reasonably have inferred from the defendant’s act of raising a nightstick in a threatening manner, after the principal took the property from the victim, that the defendant possessed the requisite mental culpability for the crime charged (see, People v Barnes, 50 NY2d 375, 381; People v Bracey, 41 NY2d 296, 301; Penal Law § 20.00).

The defendant’s remaining contention is unpreserved for review (see, People v Whalen, 59 NY2d 273, 279-280; People v Thomas, 50 NY2d 467), and is, in any case, without merit (see, People v Barnes, supra, at 380). Lawrence, J. P., Eiber, Sullivan and Harwood, 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 Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.), rendered December 9, 1985, convicting him of grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, having observed a larceny while it was in progress and having assisted the perpetrator' to complete that larceny, is liable as an accomplice to the larceny (see, People v Robinson, 60 NY2d 982, 984). Moreover, the jury could reasonably have inferred from the defendant’s act of raising a nightstick in a threatening manner, after the principal took the property from the victim, that the defendant possessed the requisite mental culpability for the crime charged (see, People v Barnes, 50 NY2d 375, 381; People v Bracey, 41 NY2d 296, 301; Penal Law § 20.00).

The defendant’s remaining contention is unpreserved for review (see, People v Whalen, 59 NY2d 273, 279-280; People v Thomas, 50 NY2d 467), and is, in any case, without merit (see, People v Barnes, supra, at 380). Lawrence, J. P., Eiber, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

130 A.D.2d 605, 515 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 46619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tucker-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack