People v. Decamp

• Decision Date: 01 December 2022
• Docket Number: 113117
• Citation: 178 N.Y.S.3d 829
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Tyler J. DECAMP, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

178 N.Y.S.3d 829

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Tyler J. DECAMP, Appellant.

113117

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Calendar Date: October 11, 2022
Decided and Entered: December 1, 2022

178 N.Y.S.3d 830

John R. Trice, Elmira, for appellant.

Michael A. Korchak, District Attorney, Binghamton (Rita M. Basile of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Garry, P.J., Clark, Aarons, Pritzker and Fisher, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Fisher, J.

178 N.Y.S.3d 831

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Kevin P. Dooley, J.), rendered October 18, 2019, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of assault in the first degree (two counts), tampering with physical evidence and resisting arrest.

Defendant was charged by indictment with two counts of attempted murder in the second degree, two counts of assault in the first degree, tampering with physical evidence and resisting arrest. Following a jury trial, at which defendant pursued a justification defense, he was acquitted of both counts of attempted murder and convicted of two counts of assault in the first degree (see Penal Law § 120.10 ), tampering with physical evidence (see Penal Law § 215.40[2] ) and resisting arrest (see Penal Law § 205.30 ). Defendant was sentenced to concurrent prison terms of 10 years, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision, on each of his assault in the first degree convictions, and to lesser concurrent terms on the remaining convictions. Defendant appeals.

We affirm. Defendant challenges the verdict on assault in the first degree as against the weight of the evidence, asserting that he had a reasonable belief that one of the victims was armed with a lethal weapon and that defendant used deadly force to prevent harm to his friends and himself. In assessing whether a verdict is supported by the weight of the evidence, "this Court must first determine whether, based on all the credible evidence, a different finding would not have been unreasonable and then weigh the relative probative force of conflicting testimony and the relative strength of conflicting inferences that may be drawn from the testimony to determine if the verdict is supported by the weight of the evidence" ( People v. Santiago, 206 A.D.3d 1466, 1467, 171 N.Y.S.3d 616 [3d Dept. 2022] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). For a conviction of assault in the first degree, the People bear the burden of proving, as relevant here, that, "[w]ith intent to cause serious physical injury to another person, [the defendant] cause[d] such injury to such person or to a third person by means of ... a dangerous instrument" ( Penal Law § 120.10[1] ). With respect to the defense of justification, "unless the defendant is the initial aggressor, he or she may use physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself, herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person" ( People v. Infinger, 194 A.D.3d 1183, 1184, 147 N.Y.S.3d 247 [3d Dept. 2021] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 965, 148 N.Y.S.3d 775, 171 N.E.3d 251 [2021] ; see People v. Harris, 206 A.D.3d 1063, 1064–1065, 168 N.Y.S.3d 592 [3d Dept. 2022] ). "However, a person who reasonably believes that another is about to use deadly physical force is not free to reciprocate with deadly physical force if such person knows that he or she can with complete safety as to himself, herself and others avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating" ( People v. Cutting, 206 A.D.3d 1281, 1281, 170 N.Y.S.3d 321 [3d Dept. 2022] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted]; see People v. Harris, 206 A.D.3d at 1065, 168 N.Y.S.3d 592 ).

178 N.Y.S.3d 832

The trial testimony established that the victims met defendant and a group of his acquaintances at a fast-food restaurant to purchase drugs. After tendering payment and waiting for the delivery of the drugs from a third party not at the location,...