People v. Etienne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Etienne

250 A.D.2d 776, 671 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5747

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 18, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 250 A.D.2d 776 (People v. Etienne) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Etienne, 250 A.D.2d 776, 671 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5747 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.), rendered September 19, 1996, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court did not err in refusing to charge the jury on the lesser included offense of manslaughter in the second degree. A defendant is entitled to a charge on a lesser included offense if (1) it is theoretically impossible to commit the greater crime, without, by the same conduct, committing the lesser crime, and (2) a reasonable view of the evidence would support a finding that the defendant committed the lesser offense and not the greater (see, People v Glover, 57 NY2d 61, 63). Although the first prong of the test was satisfied, no reasonable view of the evidence at trial would support a finding that the defendant acted recklessly in shooting the victim repeatedly at close range.

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, [777]*77790 AD2d 80). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Thompson and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.), rendered September 19, 1996, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court did not err in refusing to charge the jury on the lesser included offense of manslaughter in the second degree. A defendant is entitled to a charge on a lesser included offense if (1) it is theoretically impossible to commit the greater crime, without, by the same conduct, committing the lesser crime, and (2) a reasonable view of the evidence would support a finding that the defendant committed the lesser offense and not the greater (see, People v Glover, 57 NY2d 61, 63). Although the first prong of the test was satisfied, no reasonable view of the evidence at trial would support a finding that the defendant acted recklessly in shooting the victim repeatedly at close range.

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, [777]*77790 AD2d 80). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Thompson and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D.2d 776, 671 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5747, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-etienne-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack