Opinion
June 17, 1985
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (O'Dwyer, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is criminally liable under Penal Law § 20.00 as an accomplice, for acting in concert with two other unapprehended perpetrators in the commission of robbery in the first degree.
In view of the jury verdict, we are required to review the evidence in the light most favorable to the People ( People v. Di Garolamo, 107 A.D.2d 1092). Minor discrepancies in the testimony of witnesses are not sufficient to require that a witness's testimony be deemed incredible as a matter of law ( People v Gruttola, 43 N.Y.2d 116). By their verdict, it is apparent that the jury chose to discredit the testimony of defendant and conclude that he shared the intent of the other two armed perpetrators ( see, People v. Barnes, 50 N.Y.2d 375; People v. Pippins, 107 A.D.2d 826). Based upon the record, we find that the evidence was sufficient in both quality and quantity to prove the elements of the crime of robbery in the first degree beyond a reasonable doubt ( People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied ___ US ___, 105 S Ct 327; People v. Barnes, supra, at p 381). Mollen, P.J., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.