# People v. Brown

> New York Court of Appeals · November 24, 1987 · 70 N.Y.2d 857

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2588974

## Case

- **Full name:** The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Christopher Brown, Appellant
- **Court:** New York Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** November 24, 1987
- **Citations:** 70 N.Y.2d 857; 523 N.Y.S.2d 456; 517 N.E.2d 1342; 1987 N.Y. LEXIS 19066
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa Concur
- **Cited by:** 6 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2588974

## Opinion text

OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant appeals his conviction after a jury trial of two counts of robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [2], [4]) and one count of robbery in the second degree (Penal Law § 160.10 [1]), claiming the trial court erred in denying his request for a charge of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree (Penal Law former § 165.40 [now § 165.50]) as a lesser included offense of robbery. Criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree requires the possession, or the exercise of dominion or control, over tangible property (Penal Law § 10.00 [8]); the definitions of robbery in the first and second degrees are not so limited. Because the "theoretical impossibility” test in the definition of a lesser included offense cannot be met, the trial court properly refused defendant’s request
(People v
Glover, 57 NY2d 61 ;
see, People v Wheeler,
67 NY2d 960 ). There is, therefore, no need to consider whether a reasonable view of the evidence would support a finding that the defendant committed criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree but not robbery in the first or second degree
(see,
CPL 300.50 [1];
People v Glover,
57 NY2d 61, 63 ,
supra).
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2588974. Public record. Not legal advice.