Summary
finding that juvenile had committed acts constituting robbery in the second degree where he arrived at the crime scene with seven other youths, one of whom punched the victim and took his property and two of whom punched and kicked the victim while the other youths, including the defendant, surrounded the victim
Summary of this case from Pierre v. City of New YorkOpinion
June 27, 1994
Appeal from the Family Court, Queens County (De Phillips, J.).
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find that it was legally sufficient to support the findings of the Family Court. In order to hold an individual liable for the conduct of another, the prosecution must show that the individual acted with the mental culpability required to commit the crimes charged (see, Penal Law § 20.00; see also, People v. McClary, 138 A.D.2d 413). Here, according to the victim's testimony, the appellant arrived at the location of the crime with a group of seven youths. One of the youths punched the victim in the face and rode off with his bicycle, radio, and money. The other youths, including the appellant surrounded the victim, and two of the youths punched and kicked the victim. Thereafter, the members of the group dispersed in different directions.
These uncontroverted facts were sufficient to establish that the appellant shared the intent to commit the acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute robbery in the second degree (see, Penal Law § 160.00), and assault in the third degree (see, Penal Law § 120.00; see, Matter of Juan J., 81 N.Y.2d 739; Matter of Daniel F., 200 A.D.2d 571; Matter of Aida S., 189 A.D.2d 818; Matter of Emerson D., 189 A.D.2d 712). Thompson, J.P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.