Robbery

Published on: July 9, 2012

Court Reduces Robbery Charge to Larceny Based on Lack of Force Used

by Stephen Bilkis

B was charged with one count of robbery in the third degree. On April 9th, 2010, Mr. B allegedly stole $140 from Nellisha Gregory, who worked for a Syracuse branch Bank of America. According to the indictment issued against him, Mr. B took the money by force. This is important to note since the New York Penal Code defines robbery as the forcible stealing of another person’s property. Had the indictment not claimed that Mr. B used force, he may have only been charged with petty larceny or another minor crime. Had Mr. Brown used a weapon or other dangerous instrument in the commission of the robbery, the charge may have been elevated to robbery in the first degree.

Mr. B’s criminal defense attorney filed a motion with the Onondaga County Court on the grounds that the evidence presented to the Grand Jury was insufficient to support a charge of third degree robbery. The court was charged with determining whether the acts committed by Mr. B satisfied the elements of robbery in the third degree as defined under New York law. For purposes of the Grand Jury proceedings, the standard of proof is prima facie evidence, rather than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Published on: July 5, 2012

NY Supreme Court Decides if Crime Supports a First Degree Robbery Charge

by Stephen Bilkis

H C was charged with two counts of attempted robbery in the first degree stemming from an incident that occurred on January 20, 1981. Allegedly, he attempted to grab bags from two women standing on a subway platform. Mr. C was unsuccessful in attempting to steal either bag. Additionally, Mr. C was charged one count of first degree robbery and one count of attempted first degree robbery for stealing a bag from another woman who was standing on a subway platform. Mr. C’s criminal defense attorney filed a motion to dismiss these charges based on the arguments that the events that were reported did not satisfy the elements of robbery or attempted robbery. Under New York law, robbery in the first degree and attempted robbery in the first degree require an element of force, threat or use of a dangerous instrument, such as a gun, knife or other weapon. This differs from other crimes involving theft of property, such as larceny or burglary.

The New York County Supreme Court was charged with determining whether the facts of the crime supported a first degree robbery charge. After reviewing the the Grand Jury proceedings, the court held that the evidence presented was sufficient to charge Mr. C with first degree robbery and first degree attempted robbery.

Published on: July 3, 2012

New York Appellate Court Decides if Robbery Charges Should Stand Based on the Evidence Presented

by Stephen Bilkis

R T was charged with three counts of robbery in the first degree and three counts of robbery in the third degree for his alleged participation in an event that occurred on October 9, 1977. Mr. T’s brother George was also charged for his alleged role in the crime.

Early in the morning on the day in question, Nathaniel S, Magdelena H and Mildred L were at a Manhattan bar known as “Location 40”, located at 1624 Amsterdam Avenue. H owned the bar and her sister M worked as a barmaid. S was a patron of the establishment. Shortly before 2:00 in the morning, Harris went outside to take out the garbage. While outside, she noticed two men standing a telephone booth across the street. One man was wearing a green parka while the other wore an orange rain suit. At approximately 2:15 a.m., the man in the green parka, whom Harris recognized as a customer named R T, came into the bar carrying an open can or either beer or soda inside a paper bag. H informed Mr. T that he could not bring the drink in with him. Mr. T then said he wanted to use the phone and proceeded to the rear of the bar. Apparently, he was not successful in completing the call and three witnesses stated that the coin he deposited was returned.

Published on: July 2, 2012

New York Appellate Court Reverses, Claiming Double Jeopardy

by Stephen Bilkis

D was charged with first-degree robbery, a charge that was later dismissed by the trial court based on insufficient evidence. At the close of the trial, Mr. M’s attorney argued that the prosecutor had failed to establish the use or threat of use of a dangerous weapon, which was considered an essential element of the crime. Robbery differs from other crimes involving the deliberate theft of someone’s property, such as larceny, which typically does not involve the use of force.

The trial judge agreed with this argument and instructed the jurors that they could find Mr. M guilty only of robbery in the second or third degree. The jury was unable to reach a verdict and a mistrial was declared.

Published on: June 30, 2012

Defendant Successfully Files for Writ of Habeas Corpus

by Stephen Bilkis

Shortly after 11 p.m. on Friday, January 6, 1994, two people forced their way into the South Third Street apartment of the Garcia family. The two individuals threatened Bernardo G as well as his wife and two young daughters. They then forced Mr. G to give them the keys to Diana’s Grocery, of which the as were owners. At some point during the robbery, another person entered the apartment. Additional individuals were involved in the robbery of the grocery store and the involved parties communicated via walkie-talkie throughout the event.

On March 4, 1994, neighborhood resident John V was arrested shortly after stopping at the Garcia’s store, apparently to buy a snack. He alone stood trial for the robbery. The other individuals who were arrested pled guilty to their charges. Mr. V was found guilty of six counts of robbery in the first degree, four counts of robbery in the second degree, five counts of burglary in the first degree and two counts of assault in the second degree. Had the Gs not been home when the crime occurred, the men would likely have been charged with burglary or another lesser crime, such as larceny.

Published on: June 23, 2012

Defendant Files for Appeal Arguing Trial Court Disallowed Expert Testimony

by Stephen Bilkis

Quentin A was convicted of the robbery of a 13-year-old girl. The victim in the case testified that he used a knife to commit the crime, which distinguished it from other crimes involving the theft of property, such as petty larceny, which does not involve the use of force or threats. Mr. A appealed his case to the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court. His defense lawyer argued that Mr. A deserved a new trial since the trial court did not allow the defense to submit expert testimony concerning the validity of eyewitness identifications.

According to the victim, Farhana U., Mr. A approached her as she was walking down the stairs into the subway at Essex and Delancey Streets. Mr. A came within two feet of her and asked for some change. Farhana told Mr. A she did not have any change and continued down the stairs. Mr. A walked past her up the stairs, then came back down and stood in front of her. He proceeded to hold a knife to her neck and demand that she give him the necklace she was wearing. Farhana resisted but Mr. A grabbed the necklace and proceeded to run off up the stairs. Farhana reported the robbery to the token booth clerk.

Published on: June 2, 2012

Can a Person Be Convicted of a Crime Where They Weren’t Present? New York Courts Decide

by Stephen Bilkis

There are so many different ways a crime can be committed. One of these crimes wherein different “artistic” means can be done in order to succeed in their intention is robbery. It is almost a daily occurrence in some parts of the country and the world as well. That is why the United States court of law is ever determined to make the law applicable to everyone and every possible case there is.

This is what supposed to be a “common” bank robbery. According to a Lawyer, the defendant went to a branch of Manufacturers Hanover Bank at the intersection of Jamaica Avenue and Hollis Court Boulevard in Queens County teller at around 1:30 in the afternoon on July 3, 1981. In fact it is very important to note that the teller was the only witness of this particular robbery.

Published on: June 1, 2012

New York Court Discusses Legal Definition of an Accomplice to Robbery

by Stephen Bilkis

It is common to find that in most robbery cases, it involves the role of an accomplice. This is especially noticeable when it comes to bank robberies and other major establishments compared to the petty 1:1 theft. So how far or how intense would be the involvement and punishment of the accomplice in robbery cases? You can get to know more about it with this case of Stanley Hedgeman which was handled by a competent lawyer.

According to credible source, the accomplice is defined as the one who usually drives the getaway car and is not present at the actual scene of the crime. Instead, he is situated from a short distance to give immediate assistance to the robber. He is defined as someone not actually present but is considered to be an aggravating force to the entire crime. What is being questioned in this case is whether the placement of Hedgeman’s car near the scene of the crime is just circumstantial or it proves that he is truly an accomplice of the actual robber. What makes the investigation a lot more solid is because of the bank teller who served as witness according to a policeman.

Published on: May 31, 2012

Can One Be Convicted of Robbery Where There Was No Weapon? New York Court Decides

by Stephen Bilkis

One of the most common robbery crimes is robbing a bank. It is logically so because it is suppose to be where the money is. That is why banks are equipped with alarm system. Some are pretty high technology and some are about standard; just enough to inform the authorities that there is an actual robbery taking place.

This particular case according to an expert is a bank robbery that took place one late afternoon of May 22, 2008. The defendant, John G went inside the Staten Island Bank. He then approached one of the tellers assigned that afternoon and handed her a small note. The note was written on a deposit slip read “I have a gun, Fill the bag. Don’t say anything or I’ll shoot.” The note did not actually indicated any amount so the teller went immediately complied and returned giving G a total of $1,810 which she diligently placed inside the bag that he handed to her.

Published on: May 29, 2012

What Happens When The Accused Admits His Gun Possession During a Robbery

by Stephen Bilkis

It is not known by many that you can learn a lot from studying robbery case reports that were gathered and analyzed by a reporter. With this particular report, the defendant involved is John Gr. The robbery happened late afternoon of May 22, 2008 as he entered the Staten Island Bank and approached a teller and gave her a note with instructions. The teller just complied to the instructions written which said: “I have a gun, fill the bag. Don’t say anything or I’ll shoot.” When he left the bank, the teller immediately locked it and informed the police.

What was good about this scene is that according to a source, there was a video surveillance which helped in identifying better the suspect. When the investigation was pursued, the teller was able to identify the defendant when placed in a lineup. In this case, John G is fighting for his right to lessen the degree of robbery since according to him, he was not carrying any gun even if his note said so. The court said that even if it was not proven that he was truly armed with a life threatening instrument or tool, he was still capable at that moment of causing harm or even death to others.