Summary
In People v. Ross, 180 A.D.2d 698, 579 N.Y.S.2d 713, (N.Y. App. Div. 1992), the Appellate Division stated that the victim's testimony about the pain she experienced when the defendant grabbed her purse from her hand was sufficient evidence for the jury to have "rationally concluded that the defendant employed physical force to overcome the victim's resistance to the taking of her property."
Summary of this case from Hunt v. StateOpinion
February 10, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Firetog, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the People failed to present legally sufficient evidence to prove that he used or threatened the immediate use of "physical force" (Penal Law § 160.00), which was necessary to support his conviction for robbery in the third degree. However, this argument is unpreserved for appellate review as it was not presented with specificity before the trial court in support of the defendant's motion to dismiss made at the close of the People's case (see, People v. Bynum, 70 N.Y.2d 858; People v. Gomez, 67 N.Y.2d 843; People v. Harrison, 167 A.D.2d 353). In any event, the victim testified that she experienced pain which radiated the length of her arm when the defendant, who had approached her from behind, pulled a bag from her hand. Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People (People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that the jury could have rationally concluded that the defendant employed physical force to overcome the victim's resistance to the taking of her property (see, People v. Crandall, 135 A.D.2d 1084; cf., People v Lumpkin, 173 A.D.2d 738; People v. Davis, 71 A.D.2d 607; see generally, People v. Santiago, 62 A.D.2d 572, affd 48 N.Y.2d 1023).
Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
Finally, we decline to disturb the sentence imposed. Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Miller and Copertino, JJ., concur.