Defendant's claim that the court should have charged the affirmative defense to first-degree robbery (Penal Law § 160.15 [4]) is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would reject it. It is clear that defendant's strategy was to argue that in each incident the evidence established, at most, that he used only verbal threats and that he was thus guilty of no higher crime than third-degree robbery, a crime submitted...
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.
