Majority
p. 883The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gregory Dantzler, Appellant. [936 NYS2d 911]
p. 884
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, “the Supreme Court’s charge to the jury regarding accomplice liability did not unlawfully amend the indictment or impermissibly introduce a new theory of culpability into the case” (People v Cordice, 306 AD2d 354 [2003]; see People v Buanno, 296 AD2d 600 , 601 [2002]), because “[w]hether a defendant is charged as a principal or as an accomplice to a crime has no bearing on the theory of the prosecution” (People v Rivera, 84 NY2d 766 , 769 [1995]).
However, the sentence imposed was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Angiolillo, J.E, Florio, Chambers and Hall, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Buanno 296 AD2d 600 at 601 p. 884
- People v. Rivera 84 NY2d 766 at 769 p. 884