People v. Ram

127 A.D.3d 512, 4 N.Y.S.3d 888
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 14, 2015
Docket14549 2472/08
StatusPublished

This text of 127 A.D.3d 512 (People v. Ram) 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. Ram, 127 A.D.3d 512, 4 N.Y.S.3d 888 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Colleen Duffy, J.), rendered March 20, 2012, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s motion to suppress his written and videotaped statements was properly denied. The hearing record, including evidence of defendant’s ability to give detailed answers to nonleading questions, establishes that his intelligence and ability to understand English were sufficient to enable him to make a knowing and intelligent waiver of his rights (see People v Williams, 62 NY2d 285, 288-289 [1984]).

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). The evidence supports the inference that when defendant stabbed his wife, he did so with, at least, the intent to cause serious physical injury.

*513 Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to defendant, we find there was no reasonable view of the evidence to support the submission of second-degree manslaughter to the jury under the theory advanced by defendant.

While we are aware of the testimony of physical and emotional abuse by the wife towards the defendant, that defendant had lived a productive, crime-free life prior to this offense, that he has two sons now living alone with an uncle, that it was the defendant who called 911 to report what he had done, and that he attended to his wife until emergency responders arrived, these facts were all before the sentencing judge and we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.P., Acosta, Andrias, Moskowitz and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Danielson
880 N.E.2d 1 (New York Court of Appeals, 2007)
People v. Williams
465 N.E.2d 327 (New York Court of Appeals, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 A.D.3d 512, 4 N.Y.S.3d 888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ram-nyappdiv-2015.