People v. DiGuglielmo
| Decision Date | 16 February 1999 |
| Citation | 258 A.D.2d 591,686 N.Y.S.2d 443 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>RICHARD D. DIGUGLIELMO, Appellant. |
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find the defense of justification was disproved beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v McManus, 67 NY2d 541, 546-547). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). Although the defendant claimed that he fired three times without warning because he reasonably believed that the victim was threatening his father with a baseball bat, the jury had ample basis to conclude otherwise. The victim was described as holding the bat in a defensive manner by the eyewitnesses to the fatal shooting, and at least one witness, a ten-year-old child, heard the victim screaming "No" and "Get away from me" right before the defendant shot him.
Evidence of the victim's quarrelsome or violent nature is only admissible to support a justification defense where the defendant is aware of that reputation (see, Matter of Robert S., 52 NY2d 1046; People v Miller, 39 NY2d 543; People v Rodawald, 177 NY 408). Accordingly, the trial court properly precluded the defense from introducing such evidence. Moreover, the court's justification charge with respect to defense of a third person, when viewed as a whole, adequately conveyed the proper standards to be applied (see, People v Coleman, 70 NY2d 817; People v Crouch, 239 AD2d 597).
Contrary to the defendant's present claims, the court's procedure for responding to requests from the jury was proper and did not constitute inherently prejudicial error requiring reversal (see, People v Cook, 85 NY2d 928; People v O'Rama, 78 NY2d 270; People v Heath, 234 AD2d 388). The trial court providently exercised its discretion in framing its responses to the jury's requests for supplemental instructions and testimonial readbacks (see, People v Malloy, 55 NY2d 296, 302, cert denied 459 US 847).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Diguglielmo v. Smith
... ... at 6. Two disinterested witnesses testified that when DiGuglielmo shot Campbell, the distance between Campbell and DiGuglielmo's father was at least 10-14 feet; and according to several such witnesses, Campbell was backing away. (See People v. DiGuglielmo, Ind. No. 96-1403 (Westchester County), Trial Transcript at 191, 193-95 (Sept. 19, 1997); id. at 639, 666, 765, 686 N.Y.S.2d 443 (Sept. 25, 1997); id. at 1071-72, 1074-75, 686 N.Y.S.2d 443 (Oct. 1, 1997).) ... On direct appeal from his conviction, DiGuglielmo argued, ... ...
-
People v. Robinson
... ... Watson, 20 N.Y.3d 1018, 1020, 963 N.Y.S.2d 166, 985 N.E.2d 1227 [2013]; People v. DiGuglielmo, 258 A.D.2d 591, 592, 686 N.Y.S.2d 443 [1999], lv. denied 93 N.Y.2d 923, 693 N.Y.S.2d 507, 715 N.E.2d 510 [1999] ), and we decline to grant defendant's request to modify the long-standing precedent on this issue. Moreover, we find unavailing defendant's claim that his ... ...
-
People v. Robinson
... ... Watson, 20 N.Y.3d 1018, 1020, 963 N.Y.S.2d 166, 985 N.E.2d 1227 [2013] ; People v. DiGuglielmo, 258 A.D.2d 591, 592, 686 N.Y.S.2d 443 [1999], lv. denied 93 N.Y.2d 923, 693 N.Y.S.2d 507, 715 N.E.2d 510 [1999] ), and we decline to grant defendant's request to modify the long-standing precedent on this issue. Moreover, we find unavailing defendant's claim that his constitutional right to ... ...
- People v. DiGuglielmo