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.
PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jessica WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her, following a nonjury trial, of grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30[1] ). Defendant failed to preserve for our review her contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction (see People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19, 629 N.Y.S.2d 173, 652 N.E.2d 919; People v. Lozada, 35 A.D.3d 969, 824 N.Y.S.2d 816). In any event, that contention is without merit. The evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the People, is legally sufficient to establish defendant's theft of property, i.e., money (§ 155.00), by false pretenses (see § 155.05[2] [a]; see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672). The People presented evidence establishing that employees of Kaufmann's Department Store (Kaufmann's) were induced to give defendant cash in the amount of $1,101.97 for the “return” of two men's suits and a bathrobe that were not the property of Kaufmann's. Defendant's knowledge that the items had not been purchased from Kaufmann's was established by the employees' testimony that the tags identifying the brand names had been removed from the merchandise and that the price tags stapled on the merchandise were attached in a manner different from the manner in which Kaufmann's price tags were usually attached (see generally People v. Williams, 84 N.Y.2d 925, 926, 620 N.Y.S.2d 811, 644 N.E.2d 1367). Finally, the element of intent was established by the circumstances under which the return was arranged by defendant's accomplice and carried out by defendant (see generally id.).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
MEMORANDUM:
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: March 16, 2007
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)