People v. Gorton

• Citation: 150 N.Y.S.3d 427,195 A.D.3d 1428
• Decision Date: 11 June 2021
• Docket Number: KA 17-02227,452
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Samson C. GORTON, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

195 A.D.3d 1428
150 N.Y.S.3d 427

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Samson C. GORTON, Defendant-Appellant.

452
KA 17-02227

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

Entered: June 11, 2021

FRANK J. NEBUSH, JR., PUBLIC DEFENDER, UTICA (PATRICK J. MARTHAGE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

SCOTT D. MCNAMARA, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, UTICA (STEVEN G. COX OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., CARNI, NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND WINSLOW, JJ.

150 N.Y.S.3d 429

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

195 A.D.3d 1428

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of assault in the first degree ( Penal Law § 120.10 [1] ) and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree (§ 265.01 [2]). Defendant's conviction stems from his conduct in stabbing his housemate (victim) with a knife after the victim confronted defendant and accused him of stealing his property. We reject defendant's contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to establish his intent to cause serious physical injury. It is well settled that " ‘[a] jury is entitled to infer that a defendant intended the natural and probable consequences of his acts’ " ( People v. Barboni , 21 N.Y.3d 393, 405, 971 N.Y.S.2d 729, 994 N.E.2d 820 [2013] ; see People v. Manigault , 145 A.D.3d 1428, 1429, 44 N.Y.S.3d 620 [4th Dept. 2016], lv denied 29 N.Y.3d 950, 54 N.Y.S.3d 380, 76 N.E.3d 1083 [2017] ). Here, defendant stabbed the victim in the abdomen with a hunting knife that lacerated the victim's stomach and liver and even broke off the tip of a rib. We conclude that "the natural and probable consequence of defendant's conduct in thrusting a knife four inches into the victim's torso is, at a minimum, serious physical injury" ( People v. Simpson , 173 A.D.3d 1617, 1618, 102 N.Y.S.3d 357 [4th Dept. 2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 954, 110 N.Y.S.3d 631, 134 N.E.3d 630 [2019] ; see People v. Collins , 43 A.D.3d 1338, 1338, 842 N.Y.S.2d 624 [4th Dept. 2007], lv denied 9 N.Y.3d 1005, 850 N.Y.S.2d 393, 880 N.E.2d 879 [2007] ; see also People v. Smajlaj , 160 A.D.3d 455, 456, 73 N.Y.S.3d 560 [1st Dept. 2018], lv denied 31 N.Y.3d 1121, 81 N.Y.S.3d 381, 106 N.E.3d 764 [2018] ).

195 A.D.3d 1429

We also reject defendant's contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to establish that his actions were not justified. County Court instructed the jury on justification in defense of a person and in defense against a robbery (see Penal Law § 35.15 [2] [a], [b] ). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see People v. Contes , 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932 [1983] ), we conclude that the People disproved the defense of justification beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v. Allen , 36 N.Y.3d 1033, 1034, 140 N.Y.S.3d 465, 164 N.E.3d 271 [2021] ; Manigault , 145 A.D.3d at 1429, 44 N.Y.S.3d 620 ; People v. Brooks , 139 A.D.3d 1391, 1393, 31 N.Y.S.3d 372 [4th Dept. 2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 1026, 45 N.Y.S.3d 378, 68 N.E.3d 107 [2016] ). With respect to defendant's purported justification in defense of a person, the People established that defendant did not actually believe that the victim was using or about to use deadly physical force against him and that a reasonable person in defendant's position would not have so believed (see § 35.15 [2] [a] ; see generally People v. Wesley , 76 N.Y.2d 555, 559-560, 561 N.Y.S.2d 707, 563 N.E.2d 21 [1990] ; People v. Butera , 23 A.D.3d 1066, 1068, 803 N.Y.S.2d 856 [4th Dept. 2005], lv denied 6 N.Y.3d 774, 811 N.Y.S.2d 341, 844 N.E.2d 796 [2006], reconsideration denied 6 N.Y.3d 832, 814 N.Y.S.2d 80, 847 N.E.2d 377 [2006] ). The victim was not carrying a weapon, and defendant did not testify that he believed that the victim was doing so. There was simply no evidence for the jury to conclude that defendant believed that the victim was using or about to use deadly physical force. With respect to defendant's purported justification in the context of a robbery, "[t]here was no credible evidence that defendant reasonably believed that the victim was committing or attempting to commit a robbery" (

150 N.Y.S.3d 430

People v. Cardamone , 287 A.D.2d 407, 407, 732 N.Y.S.2d 334 [1st Dept. 2001], lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 702, 739 N.Y.S.2d 102, 765 N.E.2d 305 [2002] ; see People v. Patterson , 176 A.D.3d 1637, 1639, 110 N.Y.S.3d 190 [4th Dept. 2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 1080, 116 N.Y.S.3d 155, 139 N.E.3d 813 [2019] ; see also People v. Green , 32 A.D.3d 364, 365, 820 N.Y.S.2d 271 [1st Dept. 2006], lv denied 7 N.Y.3d 902, 826 N.Y.S.2d 611, 860 N.E.2d 73 [2006] ). Although...