From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Jackson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 13, 2001
288 A.D.2d 52 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

November 13, 2001.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered April 6, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first and second degrees and criminal possession of a weapon in the second and third degrees, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 12½ to 25 years, 7½ to 15 years, 7½ to 15 years and 3½ to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

Patricia Curran, for respondent.

Kristina Schwarz, for defendant-appellant.

Before: Rosenberger, J.P., Tom, Lerner, Rubin, Friedman, JJ.


The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant's mistrial motion made when a police witness testified that in his efforts to locate defendant he "requested a photo from the . . .", at which point he was cut off by defendant's objection. The possibility that the jury could have inferred, from this testimony, that defendant had a criminal record was remote. Moreover, the court offered to provide a curative instruction but defendant declined such relief (see, People v. Young, 48 N.Y.2d 995).

The court properly refused to charge petit larceny as a lesser included offense of robbery as there was no reasonable view of the evidence that defendant stole the complainant's car without the application of force (see, People v. Scarborough, 49 N.Y.2d 362, 369-370).

Contrary to defendant's argument, the verdict convicting defendant of criminal possession of a weapon in the second and third degrees was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The circumstantial evidence established beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant fired a weapon that was loaded with live ammunition and not blank cartridges (see, People v. Dixon, 192 A.D.2d 338, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 1013; People v. Hechavarria, 158 A.D.2d 423, 425).

Defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Jackson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 13, 2001
288 A.D.2d 52 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Jackson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANDREW JACKSON, ETC.…

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

Date published: Nov 13, 2001

Citations

288 A.D.2d 52 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
732 N.Y.S.2d 408

Citing Cases

People v. Samba

Instead, defendant argues that the People failed to prove that he was holding an “operable” gun, or a gun…

People v. O'Neal

Even assuming, arguendo, that the responses violated the court's Molineux ruling, we conclude that the court…