People v. Ahmed
| Decision Date | 28 February 1967 |
| Citation | 277 N.Y.S.2d 444,27 A.D.2d 729 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Christopher AHMED, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
J. A. K. Bradley, New York City, for respondent.
Daniel F. Kolb, New York City, for defendant-appellant.
Before BOTEIN, P.J., and STEUER, CAPOZZOLI, TILZER and McNALLY, JJ.
Judgment convicting defendant, after trial, of the crimes of robbery in the first degree and attempted robbery in the first degree, unanimously modified on the law and the facts, by reducing the judgment of conviction to robbery in the second degree and attempted robbery in the second degree and remanding the case to the trial court for re-sentence, otherwise affirmed. At one point the trial court charged the jury as follows:
This charge was improper in that it permitted the jury to find the defendant guilty of robbery in the first degree and attempted robbery in the first degree, without finding that he was armed with a dangerous weapon. (Penal Law, §§ 2124(1), 2126(2)). The court, by such charge, indicated erroneously in the circumstances of this case, that first degree robbery could be committed with an unloaded gun. The only proof was that the gun was pointed at the complainant and not used in any other manner. The record does, however, warrant a judgment of conviction of a lesser degree of such crime, to wit: robbery in the second degree and attempted robbery, second degree (Code of Crim.Proc. §§ 542, 543). The court is cognizant of the fact that the sentence imposed is, even after the reduction directed herein, still within the limits prescribed by law. However, it is for the trial court, as a matter of discretion, and only if and after he finds it warranted, to modify such sentence.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Smith
...to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a gun openly displayed during the crime was loaded and operable (see People v. Ahmed, 27 A.D.2d 729, 729, 277 N.Y.S.2d 444 [1st Dept.1967] ; People v. Gordon, 19 A.D.2d 828, 829, 243 N.Y.S.2d 573 [2d Dept.1963] ). That task proved to be immensely diff......
-
People v. Smith
...to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a gun openly displayed during the crime was loaded and operable (see People v. Ahmed, 27 A.D.2d 729, 729, 277 N.Y.S.2d 444 [1st Dept.1967] ; People v. Gordon, 19 A.D.2d 828, 829, 243 N.Y.S.2d 573 [2d Dept.1963] ). That task proved to be immensely diff......
-
People v. Davis
...216 N.Y.S.2d 755; People v. Dade, 15 A.D.2d 629, 222 N.Y.S.2d 154; People v. Gordon, 19 A.D.2d 828, 243 N.Y.S.2d 573; People v. Ahmed, 27 A.D.2d 729, 277 N.Y.S.2d 444). In combination these errors may not be ...
-
People v. Roden
...of subdivision 1 of section 2124 of the former Penal Law. Of course, to this extent we also disagree with the holding in People v. Ahmed, 27 A.D.2d 729, 277 N.Y.S.2d 444, revd. on other grounds 20 N.Y.2d 958, 286 N.Y.S.2d 850, 233 N.E.2d FULD, C.J., and BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, KEATING, BRE......