The court's finding that appellant participated in a robbery of a street vendor, and did not merely commit larceny at the same time that others were committing robbery, was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The evidence, including testimony that appellant approached the victim along with the others and fled with them, splitting into two groups, warranted the inference of accessorial liability (see, Matter of Juan J., 81 N.Y.2d 739; People v. Allah, 71 N.Y.2d 830).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.