Tag: Means or Opportunity

  • People v. Llanos, 77 N.Y.2d 866 (1991): Criminal Facilitation Requires Actual Aid in Committing the Underlying Crime

    People v. Llanos, 77 N.Y.2d 866 (1991)

    To be guilty of criminal facilitation, a defendant must provide the means or opportunity for the commission of a felony and, in fact, aid another person in committing that felony.

    Summary

    The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the reversal of the defendant’s conviction for criminal facilitation in the fourth degree. The Court held that the prosecution failed to prove that the defendant’s actions provided the means or opportunity for the commission of the underlying crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance. The defendant, upon seeing police officers, yelled “Police, Police” and knocked on the door of an apartment where drugs were subsequently found. The court reasoned that the defendant’s conduct did not enable the apartment’s occupants to possess the contraband for any longer than they would have without her actions, and therefore, she did not facilitate the crime.

    Facts

    Police officers arrived at an apartment building to execute a search warrant. As the officers walked up the stairs, the defendant saw them and yelled “Police, Police,” while also knocking on the door of apartment 14. The officers immediately arrested the defendant. After entering apartment 14, police found a large quantity of cocaine, a gun, and drug paraphernalia. The occupants of the apartment were then arrested and charged with criminal possession of a controlled substance.

    Procedural History

    The defendant was convicted of criminal facilitation in the fourth degree after a bench trial. The Appellate Division unanimously reversed the conviction, finding that the prosecution failed to establish any of the elements of criminal facilitation as a matter of law. The People appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.

    Issue(s)

    Whether the defendant’s act of yelling “Police, Police” and knocking on a door provided the means or opportunity for others to commit the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance, thus constituting criminal facilitation.

    Holding

    No, because there was no evidence that the defendant’s conduct enabled the occupants of the apartment to possess the contraband for any longer than they would have if she had done nothing. Thus, she did not provide the “means or opportunity” for the commission of the crime, nor did she in fact aid the occupants in committing the crime.

    Court’s Reasoning

    The court focused on the elements of Penal Law § 115.00 (1), which defines criminal facilitation in the fourth degree. The statute requires that the defendant renders aid that provides the means or opportunity to commit the crime and, in fact, aids a person in committing a felony. The court distinguished the facts from cases where the defendant’s actions directly furthered the underlying crime. The court stated, “Here, there is no evidence that defendant’s conduct enabled the occupants of apartment 14 to possess the contraband for any period longer than they would have had defendant done nothing. Thus, it cannot be said that defendant provided the ‘means or opportunity’ for commission of the object felony.” The court cited examples of criminal facilitation such as receiving currency which initiated a drug transaction (People v. Streeter) and transporting “buy” money (People v. Schoen) to illustrate how a defendant must actively assist in the commission of the underlying crime.