People v. Harding

2018 NY Slip Op 3734
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 24, 2018
Docket6641 51/08
StatusPublished

This text of 2018 NY Slip Op 3734 (People v. Harding) 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. Harding, 2018 NY Slip Op 3734 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

People v Harding (2018 NY Slip Op 03734)
People v Harding
2018 NY Slip Op 03734
Decided on May 24, 2018
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on May 24, 2018
Friedman, J.P., Gische, Andrias, Kern, Oing, JJ.

6641 51/08

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

v

Camor Harding, Defendant-Appellant.


Christina A. Swarns, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Eunice C. Lee of counsel), for appellant.

Darcel D. Clark, District Attorney, Bronx (Ryan P. Mansell of counsel), for respondent.



Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Villegas, J.), rendered May 19, 2014, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of murder in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 50 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defense counsel did not render ineffective assistance when he declined to assert the affirmative defense of mental disease or defect in the face of defendant's opposition to presenting that defense, and the court correctly agreed that this decision was for defendant, not counsel, to make. A defendant retains ultimate authority to decide whether to assert an insanity defense, like the closely related defense of extreme emotional disturbance (see People v Petrovich, 87 NY2d 961 [1996]; People v Thomas, 247 AD2d 284 [1st Dept 1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 906 [1998].

The court properly denied defendant's suppression motion. The record supports the court's finding that defendant was not in custody when he made statements to the police (see People v Yukl, 25 NY2d 585 [1969], cert denied 400 US 851 [1970]; People v Dillhunt, 41 AD3d 216 [1st Dept 2007], lv denied 10 NY3d 764 [2008]). In any event, defendant's waiver of his Miranda rights was knowing, intelligent and voluntary, despite his mental infirmities (see People v Williams, 62 NY2d 285, 288-289 [1984]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: MAY 24, 2018

CLERK



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

Related

People v. Petrovich
664 N.E.2d 503 (New York Court of Appeals, 1996)
People v. Yukl
256 N.E.2d 172 (New York Court of Appeals, 1969)
People v. Williams
465 N.E.2d 327 (New York Court of Appeals, 1984)
People v. Thomas
247 A.D.2d 284 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2018 NY Slip Op 3734, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-harding-nyappdiv-2018.