People v. Castro

• Citation: 529 N.Y.S.2d 554,141 A.D.2d 658
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Samuel CASTRO a/k/a Louis Torres, Appellant.
• Decision Date: 13 June 1988
• Court: New York Supreme Court Appellate Division

Page 554

529 N.Y.S.2d 554

141 A.D.2d 658

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Samuel CASTRO a/k/a Louis Torres, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

Second Department.

June 13, 1988.

Alan E. Kudisch, Kew Gardens, for appellant.

John J. Santucci, Dist. Atty., Kew Gardens (Salvatore J. Modica, of counsel), for respondent.

Before LAWRENCE, J.P., and WEINSTEIN, SPATT and BALLETTA, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Chetta, J.), rendered May 22, 1985, convicting him of murder in the second degree, attempted murder in the second degree, robbery in the first degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the People ( see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt. The complainant testified that the defendant entered his grocery store, pointed a handgun at his head, threatened to shoot him, and took two gold chains from him. A bystander, who was a co-owner of the complainant, testified that, as the defendant left the grocery store, he fired at least two shots at the bystander and the man standing next to the bystander (hereinafter the victim). After the victim fell, fatally wounded, the bystander took the victim's gun from his waistband and shot back at the defendant with it. Security officers, who heard the shots, pursued the defendant who fled holding a gun in his hand. Within minutes of the shooting, the defendant was apprehended by the security officers who ordered him to drop his gun. The security officers turned the gun over to the police and subsequent ballistics tests showed that the gun the security officers had seized fired the fatal bullet.

The defendant testified that while he committed the robbery, he had carried only a toy gun, which he lost as he fled, and that the gun which fired the fatal bullet was dropped by the bystander at the place where the defendant was apprehended by the security officers. According to the defendant, the security officers incorrectly concluded that the gun they recovered was his gun. The jury was entitled to credit the testimony of the People's witnesses and reject the testimony of the defendant. Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses ( see, People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94, 68 N.E. 112). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record ( see, People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88, 353 N.Y.S.2d 500). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15[5] ).

We reject the defendant's contention that the trial court's felony murder charge did not require the jury to determine whether the bullet which caused the victim's death came from a gun fired by the defendant. The felony murder charge specifically indicated that the defendant was accused of shooti the victim with a pistol, thereby causing his death. Accordingly, the court's subsequent references to the causation issue would have been understood by the jury as meaning that they must find that the defendant...