In a recent opinion coming out of a New York court, the defendant unsuccessfully appealed his guilty conviction for manslaughter in the first degree. The defendant’s case emerged after he got into a physical altercation with another man. Following the altercation, police showed up at the scene and questioned the defendant extensively. Based on testimony from these officers as well as other people familiar with the incident, the defendant was found guilty. On appeal, he argued that the court had incorrectly instructed the jury on how to proceed in deciding his case. Disagreeing with the defendant, the court eventually affirmed the original verdict.
Facts of the Case
According to the opinion, the defendant was charged with manslaughter in the first degree after he choked another person for several minutes with an intent to cause serious physical injury. After the incident, the defendant spoke to police officers and explicitly admitted that he had choked and strangled the victim. He later spoke with a friend and a cousin, who both testified during the trial that the defendant had admitted the crimes to them soon after.
At trial, the defendant testified that he only briefly grabbed the victim’s neck. According to the defendant, his only goal was to stop the victim from fighting him, and he was acting more out of self-defense than out of aggression.
The defendant was found guilty at trial, and he promptly appealed, arguing that the court wrongly instructed the jury on part of the relevant law. During the trial, the court described to the jury the circumstances in which deadly physical force is justified. Self-defense in New York is referred to as the defense of justification. This instruction biased the jury, said the defendant, because he only used non-deadly force, and the notion of deadly force should not have been introduced into the trial at all.
The court considered the defendant’s argument but ultimately ruled against him. The first point to consider, said the court, was that there was sufficient evidence to establish that the defendant had acted violently toward the victim. It was unreasonable to believe that the defendant had only briefly grabbed the victim’s neck, given the statements he made to law enforcement, his friend, and his cousin.
In addition, even if the defendant had acted exclusively with non-deadly force, the fact that the court instructed the jury about deadly force was harmless. The court noted that the defendant did not provide any evidence proving that his defense was undermined by the incorrect instruction. Considering this lack of evidence, said the court, the error was harmless either way.
After articulating its reasoning, the court denied the defendant’s appeal and his conviction was affirmed.
Have You Been Charged with a Violent Crime in the State of New York?
If you or a loved one is facing a New York violent crime, give us a call at Tilem & Associates. We pride ourselves in offering you exceptional representation that focuses on what matters most to you. Our team is committed to protecting your rights and making sure your voice is heard. For a free consultation, call us at 877-377-8666.