Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. AKOMAH

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Jun 3, 2008

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his request to submit the lesser-included offense of robbery in the third degree to the jury. However, the defendant's conduct, as perceived by the complainant, was the display of a gun within the meaning of Penal Law ยง 160.10 (2). Thus, a reasonable view of the evidence would not support the conclusion that the crime occurred without the display of a gun ( see People v Cooper, 294 AD2d 592; People v Ruiz, 220 AD2d 466; People v Maynard, 211 AD2d 505; People v Mays, 178 AD2d 557). Accordingly, the defendant's request for a charge on the lesser-included offense of robbery in the third degree was properly denied.

Moreover, the trial court properly refused to charge the noninclusory concurrent count of grand larceny in the fourth degree ( see CPL 300.40 [a]; People v Leon, 7 NY3d 109, 113-114).

The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).