People v. McGee
| Decision Date | 02 May 1994 |
| Citation | 204 A.D.2d 353,611 N.Y.S.2d 261 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Edward McGEE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead (Robert B. Kenney, of counsel), for appellant.
James M. Catterson, Jr., Dist. Atty., Riverhead (Patricia M. Filiberto, of counsel), for respondent.
Before THOMPSON, J.P., and BALLETTA, PIZZUTO and JOY, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Tisch, J.), rendered February 4, 1992, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
During the early morning hours of December 9, 1990, the complainant was beaten about the head and body by some unidentified assailants and then robbed of his coat, his Seiko wristwatch, and his wallet. Immediately before losing consciousness, the complainant saw the defendant, whom he had encountered in a bar earlier in the evening, standing directly in front of him and removing a long-barreled, silver revolver from his waistband. The complainant subsequently selected the defendant from a lineup, and he was arrested and convicted of robbery in the first degree for his participation in these acts.
The defendant claims for the first time on appeal that his mere presence at the crime scene, albeit in the possession of a revolver, is insufficient to prove his intent to commit robbery, either alone or with others. Because the defendant made only generalized motions for a trial order of dismissal and did not alert the trial court to the issue of his lack of intent, he has failed to preserve this issue for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Logan, 74 N.Y.2d 859, 547 N.Y.S.2d 828, 547 N.E.2d 83; People v. Colavito, 70 N.Y.2d 996, 526 N.Y.S.2d 432, 521 N.E.2d 439; People v. Wade, 187 A.D.2d 687, 590 N.Y.S.2d 245; People v. Delisser, 177 A.D.2d 702, 577 N.Y.S.2d 84).
In any event, the issue is without merit. Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of robbery in the first degree beyond a reasonable doubt.
The intent to commit a crime may be implied by the act itself, or it may be established by the defendant's conduct and the surrounding circumstances (see, People v. Bracey, 41 N.Y.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kayo v. Mertz
...by the act itself." People v. Strong , 179 Misc.2d 809, 689 N.Y.S.2d 341, 345 (2d Dep't 1999) ; see also People v. McGee , 204 A.D.2d 353, 354, 611 N.Y.S.2d 261 (2d Dep't 1994) ("The intent to commit a crime may be implied by the act itself, or it may be established by the defendant's condu......
-
People v. Thompson
...surrounding an alleged act ( See People v. Bracey, 41 N.Y.2d 296, 392 N.Y.S.2d 412, 360 N.E.2d 1094 [1977]; People v. McGee, 204 A.D.2d 353, 611 N.Y.S.2d 261 [N.Y. App.Div. 2nd Dept.] lv. denied 84 N.Y.2d 870, 618 N.Y.S.2d 15, 642 N.E.2d 334 [1994]; People v. Turner, 141 A.D.2d 878, 529 N.Y......
-
Strong v. Montava
...defendant's assertions, the element of intent necessary to establish the crime may be implied by the act itself (see, People v. McGee, 204 A.D.2d 353, 611 N.Y.S.2d 261). Finally, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People (People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349,......
-
People v. Toro
...296, 301, 392 N.Y.S.2d 412, 360 N.E.2d 1094 [1977] ; People v. Stevens , 26 A.D.3d 396, 811 N.Y.S.2d 84 [2006] ; People v. McGee , 204 A.D.2d 353, 611 N.Y.S.2d 261 [1994] ), here, there were no factual allegations from which it can even be inferred that defendant's conscious objective was t......