 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
OPINION
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
TRIAL COURT DEFENDANT MEMORANDUM RESPONDENT CONVICTION JURY EXPERT PSYCHIATRIC EVIDENCE REQUEST MURDER TESTIMONY DISCRETION NY2D JUDGE JEWELS GENERAL RULE ADMISSIBILITY LIMITS EXPERT TESTIMONY LIE SOUND DISCRETION LEE CRONIN EXCLUDING CHIEF JUDGE KAYE JUDGES SMITH LEVINE CIPARICK WESLEY ROSENBLATT GRAFFEO CONCUR |
1 No. 20
The People &c.,
Respondent,
v.
Vincent Williams,
Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________
2002 NY Int. 22
March 14, 2002
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication in the New York Reports.
Michael J.Z. Mannheimer, for appellant.
Patricia Curran, for respondent.
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM:
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree after a
jury trial. Defendant sought to introduce expert psychiatric evidence
with regard to his justification defense "(i)n order to have the jury
properly understand (his) state of mind as it impacts on his intent."
To give defendant's request the "in-depth thought that it deserves,"
the trial court asked for an offer of proof as to the content of the
proposed expert psychiatric evidence. Defendant indicated that the
expert would testify that "at the time of the murder (defendant)
demonstrated paranoid delusional thinking and behavior" and "believed
the victim of the murder was going to rob him of thousands of dollars
worth of jewels." The trial court denied the request, and the
Appellate Division subsequently affirmed defendant's conviction.
"As a general rule, the admissibility and limits of expert testimony
lie primarily in the sound discretion of the trial court" (see, People
v Lee, , 96 NY2d 157, 162; People v Cronin, , 60 NY2d 430, 433).
We agree with the Appellate Division to the extent it determined that
the trial court properly exercised its discretion in excluding the
testimony of the expert.
Order affirmed, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith,
Levine, Ciparick, Wesley, Rosenblatt and Graffeo concur.
SNIPPETS:
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
