LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

PEOPLE v CURTIS Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CourtCode: AP, CourtName: NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS, Plaintiff: PEOPLE, State: NEW YORK, UniqueCaseRef: NE>AP>089_1003, Appellant, Affirm, Respondent, Memorandum, Assault, Judge, Instruction, Appellate Division, Jury, Evidence, Charge-down, Satisfy, Belt, Cpl, Unchallenged Instruction, Fact-finding Responsibility, Dangerous Instrumentality Element, Crime, Defense Entitlement, Butler, Ny2d, Meritless, Chief Judge Kaye, Judges Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley Concur , ContentID: 120251435

Case Documents
1 1997-03-27 OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 125344
1 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 1 page.    CAUTION.    PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS A ONE PAGE CASE.
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
AFFIRM
RESPONDENT
MEMORANDUM
ASSAULT
JUDGE
COURT
INSTRUCTION
APPELLATE DIVISION
JURY
EVIDENCE
CHARGE-DOWN
SATISFY
BELT
CPL
UNCHALLENGED INSTRUCTION
FACT-FINDING RESPONSIBILITY
DANGEROUS INSTRUMENTALITY ELEMENT
CRIME
DEFENSE ENTITLEMENT
BUTLER
NY2D
MERITLESS
CHIEF JUDGE KAYE
JUDGES TITONE
BELLACOSA
SMITH
LEVINE
CIPARICK
WESLEY CONCUR


  PEOPLE, & C., RESPONDENT, v. JOHN CURTIS, APPELLANT.

    89 N.Y.2d 1003, 679 N.E.2d 634, 657 N.Y.S.2d 395 (1997).
    March 27, 1997

   1 No. 52 (1997 NY Int. 49)
   Decided March 27, 1997
     _________________________________________________________________

   This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
   publication in the New York Reports.

   Stephen M. Cowherd, for Appellant.
   Richard Nahas, for Respondent.

   MEMORANDUM:

   The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

   Defendant was convicted after a jury trial of two counts of assault in
   the second degree. The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment and a
   Judge of this Court granted leave to appeal.

   We now affirm. The courts below correctly concluded that no reasonable
   view of the evidence supported the requested charge-down to
   third-degree assault under all the circumstances of the evidence
   adduced in this case, including the nature, manner and use of the belt
   (see, CPL 300.50). The trial court's unchallenged instruction to the
   jury concerning its fact-finding responsibility with respect to the
   dangerous instrumentality element was necessary to satisfy the
   requirement that the People prove all elements of the crime beyond a
   reasonable doubt. The instruction did not create a defense entitlement
   to a charge-down to assault in the third degree (see, People v
   Butler, 84 NY2d 627, 630).

   We have considered the other issues tendered to this Court and are
   satisfied that they are meritless.

   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

   Order affirmed, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone,
   Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur.

   Decided March 27, 1997

SNIPPETS:
  • This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
  • Stephen M. Cowherd, for Appellant.
  • Richard Nahas, for Respondent.
  • The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment and a Judge of this Court granted leave to
  • We now affirm.
  • The courts below correctly concluded that no reasonable view of the evidence supported the
  • The trial court's unchallenged instruction to the jury concerning its fact-finding
  • The instruction did not create a defense entitlement to a charge-down to assault in the third
  • We have considered the other issues tendered to this Court and are satisfied that they are
  • Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur.
  •    |