## Facts

- Cecile Lawrence, a University of Bridgeport security guard, was walking to work at night when she heard someone approaching from behind.
- Lawrence turned and saw two men: Clifton Kennedy and Albert Lopez.
- Kennedy, visibly agitated, repeatedly demanded money and said, “Give me your money or I’ll do you right here.”
- Lawrence told Kennedy she had no money and testified she was afraid Kennedy was going to shoot her.
- Kennedy pulled on Lawrence’s backpack in a way that pinned her arms behind her back.
- While Lawrence was restrained, Lopez rummaged through her pockets looking for money.
- Lopez did not find any money and told Kennedy that Lawrence had none; Lopez also told Kennedy not to “do her.”
- Kennedy and Lopez took Lawrence’s backpack and ordered her to walk away without looking back.
- As Lawrence left, Kennedy threatened her again, saying, “Do not turn around or I’ll do you.”
- Lopez was convicted (along with Kennedy) of robbery in the first degree under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-134(a)(4) and related offenses; Lopez appealed, arguing the evidence did not support the firearm-representation element of first-degree robbery.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient for a jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that, during the robbery, a participant “threaten[ed] the use of what he represents by his words or conduct to be a firearm” under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-134(a)(4), even though no gun was displayed and no one explicitly said “gun.”
2. Whether Lopez could be convicted of first-degree robbery as a participant when Kennedy made the threatening statements and Lopez assisted in carrying out the robbery.

## Decision

- The Appellate Court of Connecticut affirmed the judgment of conviction.
- The court held that the jury reasonably could find that Kennedy’s repeated threats (“I’ll do you right here,” and “Don’t turn around or I’ll do you”), in the setting of a nighttime street robbery and while the victim was physically restrained, conveyed a threatened use of what Kennedy represented to be a firearm.
- The court ruled that § 53a-134(a)(4) does not require proof that a firearm actually existed, nor does it require the robber to display a gun or expressly mention one.
- Because Lopez actively participated in the robbery while the threat occurred, the jury could hold Lopez liable for first-degree robbery based on a participant’s firearm-related representation during the jointly committed crime.

## Legal Principles

- Under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-134(a)(4), the state may prove first-degree robbery by showing that the defendant or another participant “displays or threatens the use of what he represents by his words or conduct to be a firearm”; the state need not prove an actual firearm was present.
- The firearm-representation element may be proved by words and surrounding conduct; the jury may draw reasonable inferences from the entire encounter, not just from any single phrase.
- An explicit reference to a “gun” is not required; indirect or coded threats can satisfy the statute when the context supports an inference that the threatened force is shooting.
- In assessing sufficiency of the evidence, an appellate court views the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict and asks whether the jury reasonably could have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
- A defendant who intentionally participates in a robbery may be convicted of first-degree robbery when another participant, during the robbery, makes the required representation of a firearm by words or conduct.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Lopez’s first-degree robbery conviction because the jury could reasonably interpret Kennedy’s threats and actions during the nighttime robbery—made while Lawrence was restrained and being searched—as a threatened use of what Kennedy represented to be a firearm, and Lopez’s active participation made him liable for the aggravated form of the offense.


State v. Lopez, 889 A.2d 254 (2006)