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. Wyatt McMAHON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Leibovitz, J.), rendered December 22, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the third degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree (2 counts), and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 3 1/212 to 7 years, 2 to 4 years and 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. “Given that defendant was in possession of the stolen property while he was engaged in [a struggle with the victim], the jury was entitled to infer that his purpose in using force was to retain control of the stolen property, not merely to escape or defend himself” (People v. Brandley, 254 A.D.2d 185, 680 N.Y.S.2d 212, lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 1028, 684 N.Y.S.2d 493, 707 N.E.2d 448). Moreover, the fact that defendant continued to hold onto the stolen items as he fled further undermines his claim that he used force only to free himself from the victim.
The court's Sandoval ruling, which suppressed much of defendant's extensive criminal record, balanced the appropriate factors and was a proper exercise of discretion (see, People v. Walker, 83 N.Y.2d 455, 458-459, 611 N.Y.S.2d 118, 633 N.E.2d 472).
The court's summary denial of defendant's application for assignment of new counsel was appropriate. Defendant made this application for the first time after a jury had been selected and preliminary instructions given. He offered only conclusory statements about counsel's purported deficiencies.
We perceive no basis for reduction of sentence.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: January 04, 2001
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First 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)