P. v. Randolph CA2/2
Gershon Randolph (defendant) challenges one of his two convictions for second degree robbery. Specifically, he argues that the evidence did not show any use of “force” or “fear” in the robbery he challenges. We reject his claim that the evidence of force or fear was so weak that no rational jury could convict him of robbery but agree with him that this is such a close case that the trial court should have instructed the jury on the lesser included crime of grand theft from a person. We accordingly reverse and remand his conviction for this robbery, but otherwise affirm.
Comments on P. v. Randolph CA2/2