People v. Mainville
| Citation | 398 N.Y.S.2d 1012,59 A.D.2d 809 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Francis MAINVILLE, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 27 October 1977 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Paul Vladimir, Forest Hills, for appellant.
Sol Greenberg, Albany County Dist. Atty., Albany (George H. Barber, Albany, of counsel), for respondent.
Before GREENBLOTT, J. P., and MAHONEY, MAIN, LARKIN and MIKOLL, JJ.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County, rendered September 25, 1975, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of murder in the first degree.
In his confession, the voluntariness of which is not challenged on appeal, the defendant admitted shooting to death a Jewish door-to-door salesman (who had been coming to defendant's house for years) in retribution for the death of George Lincoln Rockwell. Qualified psychiatrists, who had made adequate preparation, testified for both the defense and prosecution on the question of sanity (see Penal Law, § 30.05). Where there is a serious flaw in the testimony of the People's experts, the jury's determination is set aside (see, e. g., People v. Higgins, 5 N.Y.2d 607, 186 N.Y.S.2d 623, 159 N.E.2d 179 (); People v. Slaughter, 34 A.D.2d 50, 311 N.Y.S.2d 87 (); People v. Lee, 29 A.D.2d 837, 287 N.Y.S.2d 607 (); cf. People v. Silver, 33 N.Y.2d 475, 354 N.Y.S.2d 915, 310 N.E.2d 520; People v. Thompson, 34 A.D.2d 1097, 312 N.Y.S.2d 424; and People v. Hari, 30 A.D.2d 1046, 294 N.Y.S.2d 759 ()). Absent such flaws, the jury's finding of sanity will not be disturbed (People v. Wood, 12 N.Y.2d 69, 236 N.Y.S.2d 44, 187 N.E.2d 116; People v. Rock, 49 A.D.2d 666, affd. 42 N.Y.2d 845, 397 N.Y.S.2d 382, 366 N.E.2d 83).
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Demagall
...894, 662 N.Y.S.2d 437, 685 N.E.2d 218 [1997]; People v. Justice, 173 A.D.2d 144, 146, 579 N.Y.S.2d 502 [1991]; People v. Mainville, 59 A.D.2d 809, 809–810, 398 N.Y.S.2d 1012 [1977] ). Turning to the evidence adduced at trial, the basic facts of defendant's history and the events surrounding......
-
People v. Parmes
...in the testimony of the People's expert, the Trial Judge's finding of sanity should not be disturbed on appeal (see, People v. Mainville, 59 A.D.2d 809, 398 N.Y.S.2d 1012; People v. Wood, 12 N.Y.2d 69, 77, 236 N.Y.S.2d 44, 187 N.E.2d 116; cf. People v. Higgins, 5 N.Y.2d 607, 186 N.Y.S.2d 62......
-
People v. Robson
...588 N.Y.S.2d 379; People v. Hull, 162 A.D.2d 550, 556 N.Y.S.2d 741; People v. Golpe, 134 A.D.2d 449, 521 N.Y.S.2d 71; People v. Mainville, 59 A.D.2d 809, 398 N.Y.S.2d 1012). Moreover, to the degree that this argument constitutes a challenge to the weight and sufficiency of the evidence, we ......
-
People v. Bell
...of a serious flaw in the testimony of the People's experts, the jury's finding of sanity will not be disturbed (People v. Mainville, 59 A.D.2d 809, 398 N.Y.S.2d 1012). Defendant's next contention, while not grounds for reversal, merits comment. On October 18, 1976 an Assistant District Atto......