Judgment unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum:
Defendant contends that the evidence convicting him of robbery and burglary in the first degree was legally insufficient because the testimony of an accomplice, Jones, was not sufficiently corroborated. We disagree. There was ample evidence entirely independent of Jones which, viewed as a whole, was sufficient to connect defendant with the commission of these crimes (People v Hudson,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.