People v. Roldan

• Decision Date: 25 April 1996
• Citation: 88 N.Y.2d 826,666 N.E.2d 553,643 N.Y.S.2d 960
• Parties: , 666 N.E.2d 553 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Victor ROLDAN, Appellant.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 960

643 N.Y.S.2d 960

88 N.Y.2d 826, 666 N.E.2d 553

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v.Victor ROLDAN, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

April 25, 1996.

Lisa Griffin, White Plains, Andrew C. Fine, New York City, and Daniel L. Greenberg, Northport, for appellant.

Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney of Bronx County, (Lisa Ellen Mudd, Billie Manning and Joseph N. Ferdenzi, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURTMEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant was convicted of two counts of robbery in the first degree following a jury trial.Eyewitness testimony showed that defendant and an accomplice were engaged in conversation prior to the robbery, and that during the course of the crime, defendant stood by "looking out" over the surrounding area while the accomplice robbed the two victims at knifepoint.Police officers added proof that defendant and the accomplice fled the scene together and were apprehended a few blocks away.

The Appellate Division affirmed defendant's conviction, rejecting his argument that the People's case rested solely on circumstantial evidence and that the trial court erred in denying the defense request for a circumstantial evidence instruction.A dissenting Justice at the Appellate Division granted leave to appeal, and we now affirm that Court's ruling upholding the conviction.

A defendant's request for a circumstantial evidence instruction must be allowed when proof of guilt rests exclusively on circumstantial evidence (see, People v. Barnes, 50 N.Y.2d 375, 380, 429 N.Y.S.2d 178, 406...