On August 11, 1980, a man was walking outside his apartment. Two men who also frequented the apartment building where he lived came up to him and talked to him. Thinking that they were just being friendly, he stopped to chat.
A New York Criminal Lawyer said one of the men blocked his way and the other asked him for his money. When he said he didn’t have any money on him, the man grabbed his hand and forcibly took the ring he was wearing on his finger.
The two men immediately turned and left the man. He reported the robbery to the police. He gave their names to the police and their description and they were arrested. They were charged with robbery in the second degree. The indictment alleged that the two men acted in cooperation with one another and being physically present at the same time and forcibly stole the ring from the man.
During the trial, the criminal trial court judge instructed the jury that if they found evidence that the two men did not act in concert with each other then they must acquit the two accused because the indictment specifically charged that the two men were accomplices to each other.
The trial court also charged the jury that they must find proof beyond a reasonable doubt that both of the men knowingly and intentionally participated in the robbery. The trial court judge instructed the jury on the elements of robbery which included the charge in the indictment that both men aided each other to commit the crime while both of them were physically present.
A Queens Criminal Lawyer said the jury returned a verdict of guilty against the man who actually took the ring from the man’s hand and then found not guilty the man who just blocked the way of the robbery victim.
When the jury returned this verdict, the trial court judge ordered the jury that they cannot find one of the defendants guilty and the other not guilty as the charge in the indictment specifically charged them of aiding each other to commit the crime.
Later that day, the trial court judge accepted the jury verdict. Then the trial court judge accepted the motion of the defendant who was found guilty of the crime to set aside the verdict on the ground that the same was repugnant to the law. The trial court judge then acquitted the man who was found guilty by the jury.
The People appealed the acquittal by the trial court of the accused who was found guilty by the jury. The only question before the Court is whether or not the trial court judge erred in acquitting the man who was found guilty by the jury.
The Court ruled that the acquittal by the trial court judge was in order and proper. First, the charge in the indictment was specific: the two men aided each other in committing the robbery. If there is no evidence that the two men aided each other then both men must be acquitted.
Second, the law is also clear. A person is guilty of robbery in the second degree if he forcibly steals property and he is aided in doing so by another person who was actually present.
Third, the wording of the law means that when two people aid each other in committing the same crime, then both are guilty as principals. It was necessary that the People present evidence beyond reasonable doubt that both men aided each other. Without proof that the two men aided each other, then both the men must be found not guilty.
Are you facing charges of robbery in the second degree? Then you need to be represented and assisted by a New York Robbery Lawyer. A lawyer can help you prove that either you were not present at the time the acts were committed or a NYC Robbery attorney has to prove that you did not aid anyone to accomplish the robbery charged against you. Whether you have been charged with robbery, sex crimes or drug possession, contact Stephen Bilkis and Associates for guidance.https://criminaldefense.1800nynylaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1398170.html