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, etc., respondent, v. Kenneth CANDELARIA, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kohm, J.), rendered May 1, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree and unauthorized use of a vehicle in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the evidence adduced at trial was legally insufficient to support his conviction of the crimes of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree and unauthorized use of a vehicle in the third degree. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Police officers observed the defendant operating a vehicle with no lights on at approximately 3:20 A.M., closely following a stolen vehicle which also had no lights on and which had been stripped of numerous parts, including body panels and seats. As the police car approached, the two vehicles increased speed. The driver of the stripped car then pulled over and fled on foot. The defendant pulled his vehicle over a short distance away, and the driver of the stripped car ran toward it, but then changed direction as a pursuing police officer neared. The defendant then drove away from the scene and was found shortly thereafter parked approximately one block away. Parts of the stolen car were found on the person of the defendant's front-seat passenger, as well as in the yard outside of which the defendant had parked his vehicle. Under all of these circumstances, we are satisfied that a rational trier of fact could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted in concert with the operator of the stolen car in committing the offenses of which he was convicted (see, Penal Law § 20.00; see generally, People v. Rossey, 89 N.Y.2d 970, 655 N.Y.S.2d 861, 678 N.E.2d 473; People v. Allah, 71 N.Y.2d 830, 527 N.Y.S.2d 731, 522 N.E.2d 1029; People v. Whatley, 69 N.Y.2d 784, 513 N.Y.S.2d 110, 505 N.E.2d 620).
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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: February 16, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)