From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Torres

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 28, 2006
32 A.D.3d 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

9037.

September 28, 2006.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edwin Torres, J.), rendered April 21, 2005, and amended May 12, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Barbara Zolot of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Tracy L. Conn of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Nardelli and McGuire, JJ.


The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Defendant was properly convicted of robbery in the first degree under Penal Law § 160.15 (2) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree under Penal Law § 265.03 (2). The only reasonable inference that could be drawn from the chain of evidence in this fast-paced incident was that the loaded, operable pistol recovered by the police immediately after the crime was the same weapon that was used by one of the robbers ( see e.g. People v Danzler, 288 AD2d 5, lv denied 97 NY2d 753).


Summaries of

People v. Torres

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 28, 2006
32 A.D.3d 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

People v. Torres

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. Luis TORRES, Appellant

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

Date published: Sep 28, 2006

Citations

32 A.D.3d 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 6924
821 N.Y.S.2d 206

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

We nevertheless reject defendant's contentions on the merits. The fact that no prosecution witness testified…

People v. Smith

We nevertheless reject defendant's contentions on the merits. The fact that no prosecution witness testified…