People v. Taylor
| Decision Date | 16 June 1986 |
| Citation | 503 N.Y.S.2d 632,121 A.D.2d 581 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Mark TAYLOR, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Philip L. Weinstein, New York City (Charles L. Finke, of counsel), for appellant.
Elizabeth Holtzman, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Barbara D. Underwood, Sarah G. Noll and Andrew J. Frisch, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and RUBIN, EIBER and KOOPER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), rendered June 2, 1982, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal facilitation in the fourth degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Judgment affirmed.
The defendant was accused of various crimes as the result of his alleged participation in the shooting death of Keith Thomas on August 23, 1980. On the evening in question, the defendant and his codefendant Paul Clark became involved in an altercation with the victim and his cousin, Albert McLaurin. During the course of this argument Clark said to the defendant, "Pass me the piece" or "Pass me the pistol", whereupon the defendant gave Clark the handgun with which Clark shot and killed Thomas, and attempted to shoot McLaurin.
At the conclusion of their joint trial, the defendant was convicted of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and two counts of criminal facilitation in the fourth degree, but was acquitted of two counts of murder in the second degree, attempted murder in the second degree and criminal facilitation in the second degree. His codefendant was convicted of all charges upon which he was tried, including the murder counts.
The defendant contends that by acquitting him of the murder and attempted murder charges, the jury found that he had not had an intent to kill, injure or rob the deceased, and that therefore, there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, which requires proof of "intent to use the [weapon] unlawfully against another" (Penal Law § 265.03). We disagree.
The evidence adduced at trial established that the defendant handed a gun to his codefendant during the argument with two other youths, and that the codefendant thereafter shot and killed one of the youths. Viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to the people, as we must (see, e.g., People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Santana v. Filion, 98 CV 5138(NG).
...required a finding of not guilty on the second degree weapon possession charges is not correct. See id.; People v. Taylor, 121 A.D.2d 581, 503 N.Y.S.2d 632 (2d Dep't 1986). As the trial judge, Judge Eng, said, in denying petitioner's Section 440.10 motion, "the fact that the jury found the ......
-
People v. Coluccio
...element of intent may be inferred from all the circumstances (see, People v. Perez, 130 A.D.2d 595, 515 N.Y.S.2d 303; People v. Taylor, 121 A.D.2d 581, 503 N.Y.S.2d 632; People v. Evans, 106 A.D.2d 527, 532, 483 N.Y.S.2d 339). Where, as here, the defendant admitted possessing the gun, that ......
- People v. Taylor
-
People v. Breeden
...attempted murder, or assault before convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (see, People v. Taylor, 121 A.D.2d 581, 582, 503 N.Y.S.2d 632; People v. Evans, 106 A.D.2d 527, 483 N.Y.S.2d 339). "[I]n many cases, * * * there may be sufficient evidence to prove the......