People v. Fitzrandolph

• Decision Date: 08 June 2018
• Docket Number: 624,KA 16–00555
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Kevin FITZRANDOLPH, Defendant–Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

162 A.D.3d 1537
78 N.Y.S.3d 556

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Kevin FITZRANDOLPH, Defendant–Appellant.

624
KA 16–00555

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

Entered: June 8, 2018

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (KRISTIN M. PREVE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.

JOHN J. FLYNN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (DANIEL J. PUNCH OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND WINSLOW, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court ( Michael F. Pietruszka, J.), rendered December 22, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a nonjury verdict, of murder in the second degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a nonjury verdict of murder in the second degree ( Penal Law § 125.25 [1 ] ). Defendant contends that the People failed to

78 N.Y.S.3d 557

establish his guilt by legally sufficient evidence because his intoxication rendered him incapable of forming the requisite criminal intent (see § 15.25), and the verdict is against the weight of the evidence with respect to the element of intent. We reject that contention. Although there was evidence at trial that defendant consumed alcohol, marihuana, and LSD prior to the commission of the crime, " ‘[a]n intoxicated person can form the requisite criminal intent to commit a crime, and it is for the trier of fact to decide if the extent of the intoxication acted to negate the element of intent’ " ( People v. Madore , 145 A.D.3d 1440, 1440, 46 N.Y.S.3d 300 [4th Dept. 2016], lv denied 29 N.Y.3d 1034, 62 N.Y.S.3d 303, 84 N.E.3d 975 [2017] ). Here, defendant's own expert psychiatrist testified that defendant intended to kill the victim, and the nature and extent of the stab wound was sufficient by itself to establish intent (see People v. Tigner , 51 A.D.3d 1045, 1045, 860 N.Y.S.2d 542 [2d Dept. 2008], lv denied 13 N.Y.3d 863, 891 N.Y.S.2d 697, 920 N.E.2d 102 [2009], reconsideration denied 14 N.Y.3d 806, 899 N.Y.S.2d 140, 925 N.E.2d 944 [2010] ). Thus, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, we conclude that it is legally sufficient to establish defendant's criminal intent and, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of murder in the second degree, we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence with respect to the element of intent (see generally People v. Danielson , 9 N.Y.3d 342, 349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ; People v. Bleakley , 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672 [1987] ).

We...