From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Yopp

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 7, 1988
142 A.D.2d 982 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

July 7, 1988

Appeal from the Erie County Court, McCarthy, J.

Present — Dillon, P.J., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Balio, JJ.


Judgment affirmed. All concur, Dillon, P.J., not participating. Memorandum: The recent, unexplained, exclusive possession of the fruits of the crime entitled the jury to infer that defendant committed the larceny and burglary (see, People v. Shurn, 69 A.D.2d 64, 68-69; see also, Knickerbocker v. People, 43 N.Y. 177; People v. Donaldson, 107 A.D.2d 758; People v. Measheaw, 108 A.D.2d 952). The requirement that defendant's possession be exclusive was satisfied by possession which was joint with others with whom he acted in concert (see, People v. Shurn, supra, at 69).

The court did not err in refusing to grant defendant's request for a missing witness charge. The request made after the completion of summations and the court's charge, was untimely (see, People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424, 427-428).

We have examined defendant's remaining contention and determine that it lacks merit.


Summaries of

People v. Yopp

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 7, 1988
142 A.D.2d 982 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

People v. Yopp

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JACKIE YOPP, Appellant

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

Date published: Jul 7, 1988

Citations

142 A.D.2d 982 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

People v. Pitkin

We reject defendant's contention that the testimony of the accomplice was not sufficiently corroborated (…

People v. Gray

In any event, defendant's contention is without merit inasmuch as the court's whole charge conveyed the…