The court's finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the court's determinations concerning credibility. Appellant's course of conduct before, during and after the robbery was inconsistent with that of a mere bystander and established his accessorial liability. Appellant was part of a group that surrounded the victims, who were pushed up against a fence. Appellant remained in very close proximity, showing approval by smiling, while others in the group took money from both victims and punched one victim in the face, whereupon appellant fled with the others, one of whom was in possession of stolen property.
We have considered and rejected appellant's remaining claims.