![]() |
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
OPINION
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
DEFENDANT RESPONDENT MEMORANDUM STORE DEFENSE JUSTIFICATION SECOND-DEGREE MURDER WEAPON RIFLE STANDING PEARSOL INSTRUCTION JUDGE JURY DEFENDANT ARGUES DEADLY PHYSICAL FORCE OBJECTION CONTENTION PROPRIETY CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES MERITLESS CHIEF JUDGE KAYE JUDGES TITONE BELLACOSA SMITH LEVINE CIPARICK WESLEY CONCUR |
THE PEOPLE &C., RESPONDENT, v. RICHARD BOND, APPELLANT.
90 N.Y.2d 877, 684 N.E.2d 273, 661 N.Y.S.2d 824 (1997).
July 2, 1997
2 No. 144 (1997 NY Int. 140)
Decided July 2, 1997
_________________________________________________________________
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication in the New York Reports.
Nancy E. Little, for appellant.
Young C. Lee, for respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant was charged with second-degree murder, first-degree reckless
endangerment and second-degree criminal possession of a weapon in
connection with an incident in which he fired a volley of rifle shots
at a group of people who were standing in front of a grocery store.
The murder count arose out of the death of an innocent bystander,
Lloyd Pearsol, who was fatally injured by a stray bullet while
standing inside the store. Defendant claimed that he had fired his
rifle when he saw several individuals in the group outside the store
gesture as if to draw their own weapons. In response to a request from
both sides, the court charged the jury on the defense of
justification.
On this appeal, defendant argues that the trial court's instruction
was erroneous because it indicated that the justification defense was
available only if defendant reasonably believed that Pearsol was about
to use deadly physical force against him. However, defense counsel's
brief objection at trial to the court's justification instruction was
not sufficient to preserve defendant's present appellate claim. We
have examined defendant's remaining contention about the propriety of
his consecutive sentences and have found that claim to be meritless.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Order affirmed, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone,
Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur.
Decided July 2, 1997
SNIPPETS:
|
| | | |