People v. DiGuglielmo
This text of 952 N.E.2d 1068 (People v. DiGuglielmo) 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.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Assuming that defendant made a specific request for the material alleged to be exculpatory, we find no reasonable possibility that any failure to disclose it contributed to the verdict (see People v Vilardi, 76 NY2d 67, 77 [1990]). Moreover, we reject defendant’s claim that the evidence supporting his conviction of depraved indifference murder is legally insufficient because of our decision in People v Feingold (7 NY3d 288 [2006]). The standard enunciated in Feingold simply does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review (see Policano v Herbert, 7 [773]*773NY3d 588, 603-604 [2006]), and defendant’s claim that such a result violates the Federal Due Process Clause is without merit (Wainwright v Stone, 414 US 21, 23-24 [1973]).
Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
952 N.E.2d 1068, 17 N.Y.3d 771, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-diguglielmo-ny-2011.