From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ascheim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 5, 1986
120 A.D.2d 538 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

May 5, 1986

Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Leggett, J.).


Judgment affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People, we find that the prosecution met its burden of proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant masterminded the crimes for which he stands convicted (see, People v Kennedy, 47 N.Y.2d 196). The statements made by the defendant to an undercover detective constituted an admission of his guilt (see, People v Lipsky, 57 N.Y.2d 560; People v Cuozzo, 292 N.Y. 85). The requirement of CPL 60.50 that additional proof establish that the offenses charged were committed, was more than adequately satisfied by the testimony of Brooks and Mitchell, who were confronted by the robbers and bound by them. Moreover, there was evidence that the defendant viewed the site of the crime prior to its commission, and that the defendant was observed at the house of his accomplices the night before it occurred. This testimony provided a nexus between the defendant and his accomplices. As to the accomplices, the evidence of guilt was overwhelming. We find that the jury verdict as to each of the counts was supported by the evidence.

The other contentions raised by the defendant have been examined and found to be meritless. Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Thompson and Niehoff, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Ascheim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 5, 1986
120 A.D.2d 538 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

People v. Ascheim

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ALAN ASCHEIM, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 5, 1986

Citations

120 A.D.2d 538 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

People v. Howard

In addition to the statements of the codefendants Anderson and Bostick describing the defendant's…