Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James A. RIDGEWAY, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of attempted robbery in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 160.15[3] ) and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (§ 265.02[1] ). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the robbery conviction (see People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19, 629 N.Y.S.2d 173, 652 N.E.2d 919). In any event, that contention is without merit. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, as we must (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we conclude that it is legally sufficient to establish that defendant committed the crime of robbery in the first degree inasmuch as the People presented evidence that he displayed a weapon and demanded money (see People v. Edwards, 46 A.D.3d 698, 847 N.Y.S.2d 601, lv. denied 10 N.Y.3d 764, 854 N.Y.S.2d 326, 883 N.E.2d 1261; People v. Elliot, 298 A.D.2d 290, 748 N.Y.S.2d 745, lv. denied 99 N.Y.2d 558, 754 N.Y.S.2d 210, 784 N.E.2d 83; see also People v. Fields, 179 A.D.2d 458, 459, 579 N.Y.S.2d 16). We further conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Harding, 243 A.D.2d 401, 664 N.Y.S.2d 554, lv. denied 91 N.Y.2d 874, 668 N.Y.S.2d 572, 691 N.E.2d 644; see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672).
Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: December 31, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)