People v. Randolph

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Randolph

613 N.E.2d 536, 81 N.Y.2d 868, 597 N.Y.S.2d 630, 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 636

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 30, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by48 cases

This text of 613 N.E.2d 536 (People v. Randolph) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Randolph, 613 N.E.2d 536, 81 N.Y.2d 868, 597 N.Y.S.2d 630, 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 636 (N.Y. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant was convicted of manslaughter in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.15) and two weapons charges after he shot and killed a bystander near a fight at a block party. At the conclusion of his trial, the court refused defendant’s request that the jury be instructed on criminally negligent homicide (Penal Law § 125.10) as a lesser included offense. We conclude the ruling was correct.

A person who acts with the recklessness necessary for a conviction on manslaughter in the second degree also acts with criminal negligence (People v Green, 56 NY2d 427, 430; People v Stanfield, 36 NY2d 467, 471). However, the lesser included offense must be charged only if, under any reasonable view of the evidence as seen in the light most favorable to defendant, the jury could find that defendant committed the lesser offense but not the greater (CPL 300.50; People v Green, supra, at 430; People v Glover, 57 NY2d 61, 63; People v Martin, 59 NY2d 704, 705).

The evidence here showed that defendant pulled out a loaded weapon in his possession, aimed it into a crowded area at a fleeing man with whom he had been fighting, and was warned by a companion not to shoot because of the crowd. The gun apparently discharged when defendant’s arm was bumped. Nothing in the evidence presented could reasonably suggest that defendant failed to perceive the substantial and unjustifiable risk.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa and Smith concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant was convicted of manslaughter in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.15) and two weapons charges after he shot and killed a bystander near a fight at a block party. At the conclusion of his trial, the court refused defendant’s request that the jury be instructed on criminally negligent homicide (Penal Law § 125.10) as a lesser included offense. We conclude the ruling was correct.

A person who acts with the recklessness necessary for a conviction on manslaughter in the second degree also acts with criminal negligence (People v Green, 56 NY2d 427, 430; People v Stanfield, 36 NY2d 467, 471). However, the lesser included offense must be charged only if, under any reasonable view of the evidence as seen in the light most favorable to defendant, the jury could find that defendant committed the lesser offense but not the greater (CPL 300.50; People v Green, supra, at 430; People v Glover, 57 NY2d 61, 63; People v Martin, 59 NY2d 704, 705).

The evidence here showed that defendant pulled out a loaded weapon in his possession, aimed it into a crowded area at a fleeing man with whom he had been fighting, and was warned by a companion not to shoot because of the crowd. The gun apparently discharged when defendant’s arm was bumped. Nothing in the evidence presented could reasonably suggest that defendant failed to perceive the substantial and unjustifiable risk.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa and Smith concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

613 N.E.2d 536, 81 N.Y.2d 868, 597 N.Y.S.2d 630, 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-randolph-ny-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack