People v. Mathure

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mathure

111 A.D.2d 876, 490 N.Y.S.2d 272, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50141

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

DecidedJune 17, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 111 A.D.2d 876 (People v. Mathure) 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. Mathure, 111 A.D.2d 876, 490 N.Y.S.2d 272, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50141 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O’Brien, J.), rendered May 2, 1982, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Under the facts of this case, the jury could “conclude that it was not a reasonable possibility” that defendant’s “conduct is equally consistent with” an intent to merely seriously injure rather than to kill (People v Bracey, 41 NY2d 296, 302). Therefore, there is no basis for reducing the conviction of murder in the second degree to manslaughter in the first degree, as defendant urges on appeal (cf. People v Marrero, 67 AD2d 951).

We find that the rebuttal testimony, while improperly introduced solely to impeach defendant’s credibility, was harmless error and did not deprive defendant of a fair trial (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). We find no merit to defendant’s remaining contentions. Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O’Brien, J.), rendered May 2, 1982, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Under the facts of this case, the jury could “conclude that it was not a reasonable possibility” that defendant’s “conduct is equally consistent with” an intent to merely seriously injure rather than to kill (People v Bracey, 41 NY2d 296, 302). Therefore, there is no basis for reducing the conviction of murder in the second degree to manslaughter in the first degree, as defendant urges on appeal (cf. People v Marrero, 67 AD2d 951).

We find that the rebuttal testimony, while improperly introduced solely to impeach defendant’s credibility, was harmless error and did not deprive defendant of a fair trial (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). We find no merit to defendant’s remaining contentions. Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.D.2d 876, 490 N.Y.S.2d 272, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mathure-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack