From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Simone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 29, 1995
216 A.D.2d 252 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

June 29, 1995

Appeal from the Family Court, New York County (Judith Sheindlin, J.).


"It is well settled that in order to hold an alleged accessory liable for the crime committed by the principal actors, the People must establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the alleged accessory possessed the mental culpability necessary to commit the crime charged, i.e., in this case robbery in the second degree, and that in furtherance thereof, [s]he solicited, requested, commanded, importuned or intentionally aided the principals". ( People v. White, 178 A.D.2d 452, 453.) Contrary to appellant's claims, the evidence, when considered in the light most favorable to the presentment agency ( cf., People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621), was sufficient to support a finding of robbery in the second degree based on an acting in concert theory. The complainant testified that he was repeatedly kicked and punched by a group of youths which included appellant while one of the boys in the group removed the complainant's vest. Moreover, the victim's companion, who witnessed the incident, testified that "everybody took [the complainant's] coat and started kicking him" and that appellant kicked the complainant and hit him in the knee with a cane. Thus, the testimony establishes that appellant aided the principal actors during the robbery by punching and kicking the complainant, which served to overcome the complainant's resistance to the robbery ( Matter of Karriem E., 206 A.D.2d 476). Knowledge that a robbery was occurring is properly imputed to appellant since her conduct occurred simultaneously with the robbery ( Matter of Juan J., 81 N.Y.2d 739, affg 180 A.D.2d 495, 497; Matter of Daniel F., 200 A.D.2d 571; Matter of Karriem E., supra).

While appellant contends that there were discrepancies between the testimony of the complainant and his friend, any alleged differences in testimony were properly placed before the fact-finder for resolution. We do not find that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Kupferman, Asch, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Simone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 29, 1995
216 A.D.2d 252 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Matter of Simone

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of SIMONE J., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 29, 1995

Citations

216 A.D.2d 252 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
629 N.Y.S.2d 27

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

As the complainant struggled with the codefendant to reclaim his property, defendant repeatedly kicked the…

Matter of Horatio B

The factual findings were based on legally sufficient evidence. Appellant's intent to obtain the…