People v. Brensic
| Decision Date | 22 September 1986 |
| Citation | 506 N.Y.S.2d 570,119 A.D.2d 281 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Robert BRENSIC, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Barrett Smith Schapiro Simon & Armstrong, New York City (Mary B. Corrarino, of counsel, Eric Berry, Joshua Friedman, Eric T. Schneiderman and Lise Sulley on brief), for appellant.
Patrick Henry, Dist. Atty., Riverhead (Mark D. Cohen, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and MANGANO, LAWRENCE and KOOPER, JJ.
The defendant stands convicted of the crimes of murder in the second degree and manslaughter in the first degree as a result of his participation, along with three other youths, in the tragic and brutal killing of 13-year-old John Pius on April 20, 1979, in Smithtown, New York. The evidence adduced at the trial established that the four youths killed Pius by beating him and shoving rocks down his throat in the belief that Pius had observed them in possession of a stolen motorbike. 1
The primary issue raised by the defendant on appeal is whether the trial court properly admitted into evidence, under the declaration against penal interest exception to the hearsay rule, the custodial confession of an accomplice, Peter Quartararo. We conclude that under the circumstances of this case the confession was properly admitted into evidence, and, having reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions, affirm the instant judgment of conviction.
We begin with a review of the trial testimony.
On the evening of April 20, 1979, John Pius, a 13-year-old youth, was working with his father on his bicycle in the garage of his family's home in Smithtown, New York. At approximately 8:15 P.M., Pius asked his father if he could test-ride his bicycle by riding over to the Dogwood Elementary School located a few blocks away. Pius expected his friend Eddie Pembroke to When Pius failed to return home by 9:15 P.M., Mr. Pius drove to the Dogwood School to look for him. After walking around the schoolyard grounds, Mr. Pius canvassed the neighborhood for about 15 to 20 minutes but was unable to locate his son. Mr. Pius then stopped by the Pembroke residence and was informed that Eddie Pembroke had not seen John Pius that evening. Thereafter, Mr. Pius returned home and notified the police that his son was missing. The police arrived at the Pius home at 11:00 P.M.
be at the school. Mr. Pius permitted his son to go to the school but instructed him to return within 15 minutes. At approximately 8:25 P.M., Gail Pembroke, Eddie Pembroke's sister, observed Pius on his bicycle, pedaling "real fast" in the direction of the Dogwood School.
At 4:00 A.M., Mr. Pius telephoned Eddie Pembroke and requested that the youth show him the tree house which he and Pius had been building in the area of Pembroke's home. Their search of that location proved futile.
Later that morning, Mr. Pius and several neighbors conducted a search of the Dogwood schoolyard. At approximately 10:30 A.M., two neighborhood youths who had been playing in the schoolyard discovered Pius's bicycle, wallet and cap in a wooded area of the yard. One of the youths took the cap, but the bicycle, which was lying on its side, was not disturbed. Pius's wallet was turned over to a baseball coach who was on a nearby field. The coach subsequently contacted Mr. Pius by telephone and informed him that his son's wallet had been found. After retrieving the wallet from the coach's home, Mr. Pius returned to the schoolyard with several relatives and neighbors to conduct a further search of the school grounds. During the search, Mr. Pius's niece observed Pius's bicycle lying on the ground underneath some leaves. The niece picked the bicycle up and leaned it against a nearby tree stump.
At approximately 1:20 P.M., Joseph Sabina, one of the Pius's neighbors, discovered John Pius's body covered with leaves and branches and lying on the ground in a wooded area of the schoolyard. A log covered the right side of Pius's head and another log covered his legs. Sabina moved the logs away from the body and then notified Mr. Pius of his discovery.
Detective Thomas Gill of the Suffolk County Police Department's Homicide Squad responded to the scene at approximately 2:30 P.M. He inspected the body and observed drag marks in the dirt from the area of the tree stump where Pius's bicycle rested. The detective then conducted interviews with several persons who were present at the scene, including Sabina, who described his observations upon discovering the body. When Sabina informed Detective Gill that he had moved the log which had been covering the decedent's upper body, the detective instructed him to keep the information concerning the condition of the body a confidential matter.
The defendant, who had been riding around the schoolyard on his bicycle while the police investigation was being conducted, was also questioned. In response to Detective Gill's inquiry, the defendant stated that he was familiar with the Dogwood Elementary School area although he did not know the youths who frequented the area because he lived in another section of town. The defendant also stated that he usually "hung out" at the Smithtown High School East. The defendant further explained that he had been delivering newspapers in the immediate area when he saw the police in the schoolyard. He rode over to the yard to watch the investigation.
Members of the Suffolk County Crime Laboratory and the Medical Examiner's Office responded to the scene later that afternoon. Various items were collected from the immediate vicinity of the body and footprint cast impressions of several prints around the body were taken. The autopsy conducted on Pius's body later that day revealed that six stones had been placed in the youth's mouth, five above the tongue and one below the tongue, which blocked his air passages. In addition to multiple
bruises to the body, there were sneaker marks on Pius's cheek which were determined to be consistent with someone standing on his throat and placing rocks in his mouth. The sneaker print impression was similar to three brands of sneakers, i.e., Puma, Fayva and Spec sneakers. The cause of death was attributed to a combination of asphyxia and multiple contusions and lacerations in and about the chest and neck area. The time of death was estimated to be between 12 and 24 hours prior to the autopsy.
The police investigation of the Pius murder originally centered on three local youths, John Sparling, Michael O'Neil and Raymond St. Dennis, who had been seen in the area of the schoolyard on the evening of April 20, 1979. When O'Neil and Sparling were first interviewed by the police a few days after the murder, they denied being in the area of the schoolyard on the evening in question. Several days later, O'Neil and Sparling were separately brought to the police precinct for questioning. At that time, the police learned that O'Neil, Sparling and St. Dennis had gone to a local beer and soda distributorship in Smithtown on the evening of April 20, 1979, at approximately 7:00 P.M. Sparling met a friend at the store who purchased a case of beer for the three youths. While outside the store, the youths observed a yellow Capri automobile which belonged to Thomas Ryan pull up to the store. The occupants of the car were the defendant, Peter and Michael Quartararo, and Ryan. O'Neil, Sparling and St. Dennis approached the car and, after conversing with Ryan, they sold Ryan and his friends a six pack of beer. Thereafter, O'Neil telephoned his brother from a nearby telephone booth and made plans to see a midnight movie.
O'Neil, Sparling and St. Dennis left the beer and soda store at approximately 8:00 P.M. and walked in the direction of the Dogwood School. As the youths proceeded by the front of the school, they observed Ryan's car coming out of the schoolyard. The defendant was riding a motorbike alongside the car and was holding onto the car door. O'Neil yelled out and asked the other youths to stop but Ryan's vehicle and the defendant continued out of the schoolyard and turned onto Rice Lane. O'Neil, Sparling and St. Dennis then walked to a nearby housing development located approximately 100 to 150 yards away from the Dogwood School where they drank beer for a few hours.
In addition to suspects O'Neil, Sparling and St. Dennis, the police also investigated a local youth named Robert Burke, who had a history of violent behavior and who the police felt might have some connection with the Pius murder. Burke was alleged to have bragged to several neighborhood youths that he had killed Pius. Burke ultimately established an alibi for his whereabouts on April 20, 1979.
The defendant was also questioned by the police several days after the murder while he was with Ryan and the Quartararo brothers at the local high school. At that time, the defendant advised the police that he was not at the Dogwood School on the night of the murder but, in fact, was at a high school baseball game. It was subsequently determined that no game was played that night at the high school.
On the morning of April 28, 1979, Detectives Fountain and LaValle of the Suffolk County Police were instructed to conduct a surveillance of Robert Burke's home. The detectives began their two-hour surveillance at approximately 8:00 A.M. No activity occurred during that time, and when the detectives contacted their supervisor at 10:00 A.M., they were instructed to conduct surveillance of the O'Neil residence. As they were watching the O'Neil home, the officers observed a yellow Capri back out of a driveway down the street and drive by them. The detectives followed the car to a small shopping center where two youths exited the vehicle. The youths were later identified as Thomas Ryan and ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Quartararo v. Mantello
...also subsequently convicted of murdering Pius. Brensic's conviction was affirmed by the Appellate Division, People v. Brensic, 119 A.D.2d 281, 506 N.Y.S.2d 570, (2d Dep't 1986), but was reversed by the Court of Appeals because the confession of Peter Quartararo was erroneously used as evide......
-
Quartararo v. Fogg
...asked further if he killed Pius, the defendant Brensic replied, `If you were drunk you would have done it.'" People v. Brensic, 119 A.D.2d 281, 289, 506 N.Y.S.2d 570 (2d Dep't 1986), rev'd, 70 N.Y.2d 9, 517 N.Y. S.2d 120, 509 N.E.2d 1226 (1987). Moreover, in a subsequent conversation with f......
-
Quartararo v. Hanslmaier
...was convicted following a jury trial in 1983. His conviction was affirmed by the Second Department in 1986. People v. Brensic, 119 A.D.2d 281, 506 N.Y.S.2d 570 (2d Dep't 1986). Nevertheless, the conviction was overturned by the New York Court of Appeals on the ground that Peter Quartararo's......
-
Ryan v. Miller
...v. Brensic, 119 A.D.2d 281, 284 & n. 2, 506 N.Y.S.2d 570 (N.Y.App.Div. 1986). The Appellate Division affirmed his conviction on appeal. See id. The New York Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal, see People v. Brensic, 69 N.Y.2d 719, 512 N.Y.S.2d 1046, 504 N.E.2d 414 (N.Y.1986), and reve......