People v. Loria

190 A.D.2d 1006, 593 N.Y.S.2d 629, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1186
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 5, 1993
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 190 A.D.2d 1006 (People v. Loria) 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. Loria, 190 A.D.2d 1006, 593 N.Y.S.2d 629, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1186 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and new trial granted on count two of the indictment; indictment otherwise dismissed without prejudice to the People to re-present any appropriate charge to another Grand Jury. Memorandum: Defendant contends that County Court erred in refusing his request to charge the defense of justification. Because the evidence failed to establish that defendant reasonably believed that the victim was about to use deadly physical force, the court properly refused to charge that defense (see, People v Reynoso, 73 NY2d 816, 818; People v Watts, 57 NY2d 299). Reversal is mandated, however, because County Court prohibited defendant from testifying to the victim’s threats against him, which were related to him by third persons. That evidence did not constitute inadmissible double hearsay because it was not introduced for the truth of the matter, but rather to establish the states of mind of defendant and the victim (see, People v Miller, 39 NY2d 543, 549; People v Henderson, 162 AD2d 1038; People v Font, 160 AD2d 299, lv denied 76 NY2d 734). The court’s improper ruling precluded competent evidence that might have sup[1007]*1007ported defendant’s claim that he reasonably believed that the victim was about to use deadly physical force against him, and prevented him from presenting adequate evidence to support a defense of justification (see, People v Henderson, supra; People v Dixon, 138 AD2d 929, 930). (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Maloy, J. — Reckless Endangerment, 2nd Degree.) Present — Denman, P. J., Balio, Lawton, Fallon and Doerr, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Mencel
2022 NY Slip Op 03583 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Watkins
63 A.D.3d 1656 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
People v. Frazier
6 A.D.3d 455 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
People v. Starostin
265 A.D.2d 267 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
People v. Rossakis
256 A.D.2d 366 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
People v. Allen
231 A.D.2d 900 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
People v. Bruner
222 A.D.2d 738 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
People v. Loria
214 A.D.2d 1043 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
People v. Wynn
212 A.D.2d 969 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
People v. Orr
191 A.D.2d 1000 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
190 A.D.2d 1006, 593 N.Y.S.2d 629, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-loria-nyappdiv-1993.