People v. Bond

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Bond

684 N.E.2d 273, 90 N.Y.2d 877, 661 N.Y.S.2d 824, 1997 N.Y. LEXIS 1398

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 2, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 684 N.E.2d 273 (People v. Bond) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Bond, 684 N.E.2d 273, 90 N.Y.2d 877, 661 N.Y.S.2d 824, 1997 N.Y. LEXIS 1398 (N.Y. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant was charged with second degree murder, first degree reckless endangerment and second degree criminal possession of a weapon in connection with an incident in which he fired a volley of rifle shots at a group of people who were standing in front of a grocery store. The murder count arose out of the death of an innocent bystander, Lloyd Pearsol, who was fatally injured by a stray bullet while standing inside the store. Defendant claimed that he had fired his rifle when he saw several individuals in the group outside the store gesture as if to draw their own weapons. In response to a request from both sides, the court charged the jury on the defense of justification.

On this appeal, defendant argues that the trial court’s instruction was erroneous because it indicated that the justification defense was available only if defendant reasonably believed that Pearsol was about to use deadly physical force against him. However, defense counsel’s brief objection at trial to the court’s justification instruction was not sufficient to preserve defendant’s present appellate claim. We have examined defendant’s remaining contention about the propri *879 ety of his consecutive sentences and have found that claim to be meritless.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant was charged with second degree murder, first degree reckless endangerment and second degree criminal possession of a weapon in connection with an incident in which he fired a volley of rifle shots at a group of people who were standing in front of a grocery store. The murder count arose out of the death of an innocent bystander, Lloyd Pearsol, who was fatally injured by a stray bullet while standing inside the store. Defendant claimed that he had fired his rifle when he saw several individuals in the group outside the store gesture as if to draw their own weapons. In response to a request from both sides, the court charged the jury on the defense of justification.

On this appeal, defendant argues that the trial court’s instruction was erroneous because it indicated that the justification defense was available only if defendant reasonably believed that Pearsol was about to use deadly physical force against him. However, defense counsel’s brief objection at trial to the court’s justification instruction was not sufficient to preserve defendant’s present appellate claim. We have examined defendant’s remaining contention about the propri *879 ety of his consecutive sentences and have found that claim to be meritless.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

684 N.E.2d 273, 90 N.Y.2d 877, 661 N.Y.S.2d 824, 1997 N.Y. LEXIS 1398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bond-ny-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack