LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

THE PEOPLE &C. v MAMOUN DEIS Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CourtCode: AP, CourtName: NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS, Plaintiff: THE PEOPLE &C., State: NEW YORK, UniqueCaseRef: NE>AP>I02_0014, Alexander, Penal Law, Charge, Jury, Store, Reasonableness, Criminally Negligent Homicide, Appellant, Indictment, Brother, Deadly Physical Force, Committing, Premises, Ny2d, Terminate, Commission, Unlawful, Licensee, Memorandum, Reverse, Prejudice, Resubmit, Grand Jury, Threats, Evidence, Justification, Conviction, Defense, Pursuant , ContentID: 120251777

Case Documents
1 2002-02-14 OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 125686
3 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 3 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
ALEXANDER
PENAL LAW
CHARGE
JURY
STORE
REASONABLENESS
CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE
APPELLANT
INDICTMENT
BROTHER
DEADLY PHYSICAL FORCE
COMMITTING
PREMISES
NY2D
TERMINATE
COMMISSION
UNLAWFUL
LICENSEE
MEMORANDUM
REVERSE
PREJUDICE
RESUBMIT
GRAND JURY
THREATS
EVIDENCE
JUSTIFICATION
CONVICTION
DEFENSE
PURSUANT


   4 No. 13
   The People &c.,
   Respondent,
   v.
   Mamoun Deis,
   Appellant.
     _________________________________________________________________

   2002 NY Int. 14

   February 14, 2002

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

   Elizabeth Clarke, for appellant.
   Stephen K. Lindley, for respondent.
     _________________________________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________

   MEMORANDUM:

   The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the
   indictment dismissed, without prejudice to an application by the
   People for leave to resubmit the charge of criminally negligent
   homicide to a grand jury.

   The facts, viewed most favorably for defendant, are as follows. On
   July 13, 1997, at approximately 10 p.m., Troy Alexander, who had been
   drinking since morning, entered the convenience store where defendant
   worked. Inside the store, Alexander bumped into an elderly customer,
   nearly toppling him, accosted another customer by grabbing her waist
   and verbally abusing her when she moved away, and argued with
   defendant's brother, who was working at the cash register, over the
   amount of change received for beer he purchased. Irate and hostile,
   Alexander physically threatened defendant's brother. Defendant asked
   Alexander to leave and escorted him out of the store. Once outside,
   Alexander initiated a fight with defendant. Defendant then reentered
   the store, leaving Alexander outside. Alexander followed and, once
   inside, began throwing food and other items about the store, and again
   threatened to kill defendant and his brother. Alexander's friend was
   unable to restrain him. According to defendant, Alexander punched him
   in the back of the head, causing him to become disoriented. Defendant
   testified that he picked up a knife that was on the counter and swung
   around in an attempt to scare Alexander away. Instead, defendant
   struck Alexander in the neck, killing him. Medical evidence confirmed
SNIPPETS:
  • The People &c., Respondent, v. Mamoun Deis, Appellant.
  • This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
  • The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the indictment dismissed, without
  • The facts, viewed most favorably for defendant, are as follows.
  • On July 13, 1997, at approximately 10 p.m., Troy Alexander, who had been drinking since
  • Alexander physically threatened defendant's brother.
  • The trial court charged the jury on justification through self defense (Penal Law § 35.15)
  • A jury ultimately convicted defendant of criminally negligent homicide, for which he was
  • The court held that no reasonable view of the evidence would have permitted the jury to find
  • Although Alexander had been asked to leave the store, his conduct in reentering did not
  • We disagree and reverse.
  • Additionally, a licensee present on premises open to the public loses that privilege when "he
  • Viewing the record in the light most favorable to the defendant, as we must (People v
  • Here, a trier of fact could reasonably conclude that although Alexander originally entered
  • Alexander's violent conduct and numerous threats to kill defendant and his brother support
  •    |