The court's findings were based on legally sufficient evidence and were not against the weight of the evidence. Contrary to appellant's contention that he was merely present at the scene when his companion took the complainant's chain outside the store, there was ample evidence, including the fact that appellant and his companion had, moments earlier, followed the complainant into the store where appellant approached the complainant and demanded a quarter, as well as appellant's close proximity to the robbery and flight with his companion, from which it could be reasonably inferred that appellant intentionally aided his companion in committing the crime.
Concur — Lerner, P. J., Milonas, Ellerin, Rubin and Williams, JJ.