From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Dawson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 30, 1992
188 A.D.2d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

December 30, 1992

Appeal from the Onondaga County Court, Burke, J.

Present — Boomer, J.P., Pine, Lawton, Boehm and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant's contention that there was insufficient proof of defendant's use of force to support the conviction of robbery in the third degree. Although defendant did not use force to take the money from the victim's shirt pocket, the evidence shows that he used force for the purpose of "[p]reventing or overcoming resistance to the * * * retention [of the property] immediately after the taking" (Penal Law § 160.00).

The record fails to demonstrate that defendant was deprived of effective assistance of counsel because of counsel's failure to move to suppress identification testimony (see, People v Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 709). Further, we reject defendant's contention that counsel was ineffective because of counsel's failure to raise an intoxication defense.


Summaries of

People v. Dawson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 30, 1992
188 A.D.2d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Dawson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WALTER E. DAWSON…

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

Date published: Dec 30, 1992

Citations

188 A.D.2d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
592 N.Y.S.2d 205

Citing Cases

Vendetti v. Zywiak

As a general rule, " ‘[o]nly a stranger to a contract, such as a third party, can be liable for tortious…

People v. Haffa

Contrary to the further contention of defendant, we conclude that the evidence, viewed in the light most…