People v. Gordon
| Decision Date | 23 February 2012 |
| Citation | 2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 01354,92 A.D.3d 580,938 N.Y.S.2d 554 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Gerald GORDON, Defendant–Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 01354
92 A.D.3d 580
938 N.Y.S.2d 554
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Gerald GORDON, Defendant–Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Feb. 23, 2012.
[938 N.Y.S.2d 555]
Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Jody Ratner of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Ellen Stanfield Friedman of counsel), for respondent.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., CATTERSON, RENWICK, ABDUS–SALAAM, MANZANET–DANIELS, JJ.[92 A.D.3d 580] Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie G. Wittner, J.), rendered August 27, 2009, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first and second degrees, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 17 years, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant claims he was improperly convicted of first-degree robbery under Penal Law § 160.15(4) (displaying what appeared to be a firearm) because the police recovered an operable but unloaded pistol that the victim identified as having been displayed during the robbery. Defendant did not preserve this claim, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we reject it on the merits. We also find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence.
Defendant now asserts that the weapon must have been unloaded at the time of the robbery, so that the affirmative defense set forth in Penal Law § 160.15(4) was established. However, at trial, defendant testified and denied any involvement in the robbery, and his defense was based entirely on issues of identification and credibility. Although the court offered to charge the affirmative defense, defense counsel expressly declined that offer. Since the court's charge governs our assessment of both the sufficiency ( People v. Ford, 11 N.Y.3d 875, 878, 874 N.Y.S.2d 859, 903 N.E.2d 256 [2008] ) and the
weight ( People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ) of the evidence, [92 A.D.3d 581] we generally have no occasion to consider a defense raised for the first time on appeal ( see e.g. People v. Williams, 15 A.D.3d 244, 246, 789 N.Y.S.2d 155 [2005], lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 771, 801 N.Y.S.2d 266, 834 N.E.2d 1275 [2005] ).
We note that the trial evidence permits an inference that defendant had an opportunity to separately discard the pistol and its ammunition. Accordingly, “[t]he evidence was consistent with the pistol having been loaded at the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Taylor, 108253
...119 A.D.3d 1231, 1234, 990 N.Y.S.2d 346 [2014], lv denied 24 N.Y.3d 1043, 998 N.Y.S.2d 313, 23 N.E.3d 156 [2014] ; People v. Gordon, 92 A.D.3d 580, 581, 938 N.Y.S.2d 554 [2012], lv denied 19 N.Y.3d 864, 947 N.Y.S.2d 412, 970 N.E.2d 435 [2012] ; People v. Thaddies, 50 A.D.3d 1249, 1250, 855 ......
-
People v. Kindell
...110 A.D.3d 524, 972 N.Y.S.2d 550 [1st Dept.2013], lv. denied 22 N.Y.3d 1090, 981 N.Y.S.2d 675, 4 N.E.3d 977 [2014] ; People v. Gordon, 92 A.D.3d 580, 938 N.Y.S.2d 554 [1st Dept.2012], lv. denied 19 N.Y.3d 864, 947 N.Y.S.2d 412, 970 N.E.2d 435 [2012] ).For example, if the hearing was reopene......
-
People v. Diaz
...was not loaded and operable (see People v. Howard, 22 N.Y.3d 388, 401, 981 N.Y.S.2d 310, 4 N.E.3d 320 ; see also People v. Gordon, 92 A.D.3d 580, 581, 938 N.Y.S.2d 554 ). Further, the Supreme Court was not required to give the charge, sua sponte, since such an instruction would have interfe......
-
People v. Moore
...855, 695 N.E.2d 724 [1998] ). The prosecutor's attacks on the credibility of defendant's sister's testimony were likewise permissible [938 N.Y.S.2d 554] ( id. at 143–144, 666 N.Y.S.2d 572). Defendant did not preserve any of his remaining challenges to the prosecutor's summation, and we decl......