Criminal Law · MBE-tested
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Aaron Harding, Appellant
110 A.D.2d 715·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1985·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Aaron Harding, Appellant.
[MAJORITY]
Defendant was convicted of robbery in the second degree and robbery in the third degree for forcibly stealing jewelry from one Rhonda Whitfield. He was also convicted of robbery in the second degree and robbery in the third degree for forcibly stealing money and jewelry from Gladys Craig. Each pair of greater and lesser counts involved the same criminal transaction. Thus, the convictions of robbery in the third degree must be reversed and the counts of the indictment underlying those convictions must be dismissed because each is an inclusory concurrent count of one of defendant’s second degree robbery convictions (see, CPL 300.40 [3]; People v Lee, 39 NY2d 388).
We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, O’Con-nor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.