People v. Patini
| Decision Date | 15 April 1913 |
| Citation | 208 N.Y. 176,101 N.E. 694 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. PATINI. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Supreme Court, Trial Term, Westchester County.
Gregorio Patini was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.
James Dempsey, of Peekskill, for appellant.
Lee Parsons Davis, of White Plains, for the People.
The defendant was indicted for the crime of murder in the first degree, committed by shooting Guiseppi Vasta with a shotgun. Being tried upon the indictment, the jury returned a verdict of guilty against him as charged. When the case was submitted to the jurors, the evidence was sufficient to warrant them in resting their verdict upon the existence of a deliberate and premeditated design in the defendant to effect the death of the deceased; but, upon the facts disclosed, it was also possible for them to believe that the homicide was committed by the defendant, while he was engaged in the commission of, or in an attempt to commit, a felony upon another person.
[1][2] The Penal Law (section 1044) makes the killing of a human being, unless it is excusable, or justifiable, murder in the first degree, ‘when committed * * * without a premeditated design to effect the death, * * * by a person engaged in the commission of, or in an attempt to commit a felony, either upon or affecting the person killed or otherwise.’ As interpreted by our decision in People v. Miles, 143 N. Y. 383, 38 N. E. 456, the word ‘otherwise’ in the statute includes a felony upon a person other than the one killed. The indictment charged in one count that the killing was with a deliberate and premeditated design to effect the death of the deceased; but whether the jurors took that view of the case, or whether they believed that the defendant killed the deceased while engaged in the commission of a felonious assault upon a brother of the deceased, in either case, the indictment was good and the defendant could be convicted of the crime as charged. People v. Sullivan, 173 N. Y. 122, 65 N. E. 989, 63 L. R. A. 353, 93 Am. St. Rep. 582.
[3] The evidence, so far as it is necessary to refer to it, in order to show the situation at the time of the homicide, may be briefly stated. The jurors could find the following facts to have been established. The defendant's sister, some time previously, had gone away with the son of a man named Punturo and, upon the afternoon of the day in question, the defendant went to the house in which Punturo resided, in the effort to ascertain the whereabouts of the couple. After remaining a few minutes with Punturo, the defendant left; but, shortly thereafter, returned with a loaded shotgun and placed himself in front of the house. Standing there, he threatened to shoot persons, who came out of the house, and compelled them to go inside. According to the theory of his defense, he was defending himself against an apprehended attack by the inmates of the house, or by some of them. When Giovanni Vasta, the brother of the deceased, came out of the house and saw the defendant point his gun at him, he called out to him to, ‘Look out, there are people around here.’ The defendant said, ‘I don't care, I will shoot you too, unless you go back.’ Giovanni asked him, if he could not go home by the public street, that he was in a hurry. He started to do so and walked close to the fence, and away from the defendant; but the latter kept his gun pointed at him. While doing so, Giovanni's brother, Guiseppi Vasta, the deceased, came from the other side of the street and exclaimed to the defendant: The defendant replied: As he said that, he turned and shot Guiseppi and then shot Giovanni. Guiseppi was killed; but Giovanni recovered from his wounds. The defendant threw down his gun and ran away. The defendant testified in his own behalf and did not deny shooting the two men; but said that he believed they meant to do him ‘serious bodily harm.’ In submitting the case to the jury, the judge, presiding at the trial, instructed the jurors fully and fairly upon the law, as applicable to the crime charged and to the defense made by the defendant. He told them that, if the proof justified their conclusion that the defendant shot the deceased with a deliberate and premeditated design to effect his death, they could find him builty of murder in the first degree, and that they also had the right to convict him of that crime, if he was engaged in committing, or in attempting to commit, a felony upon the person of Giovanni, at the time. They were instructed that, if the defendant pointed his gun at Giovanni Vasta, at...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Cahill
...on the proprietor was still in progress, and this assault was an independent felony. Our decision in Wagner also relied on People v Patini (208 NY 176 [1913]), another case in which a Good Samaritan intervened in an assault on someone else only to lose his own life (see also People v Giblin......
-
State v. Reding
...are State v. Barrington, 198 Mo. 23, 95 S.W. 235; People v. Friedman, 205 N.Y. 161, 98 N.E. 471, 45 L. R. A. (N. S.) 55; People v. Patini, 208 N.Y. 176, 101 N.E. 694; Holmes v. State, 6 Okla. Crim. 541, 119 P. 430, P. 300; Turner et al. v. State, 8 Okla. Crim. 11, 126 P. 452; State v. Farna......
-
People v. Joyce
...homicide, indictable therewith or convictable thereunder.’ See, also, People v. Spohr, 206 N. Y. 516, 521,100 N. E. 444;People v. Patini, 208 N. Y. 176, 180,101 N. E. 694;People v. Marwig, 227 N. Y. 382, 386, 125 N. E. 535. If this defendant had been tried for murder in the first degree in ......
-
People v. Miller
...assault if the assault was committed on a person other than the one killed. (People v. Wagner, 245 N.Y. 143, 156 N.E. 644; People v. Patini, 208 N.Y. 176, 101 N.E. 694; People v. Giblin, 115 N.Y. 196, 21 N.E. 1062; People v. Miles, 143 N.Y. 383, 38 N.E. 456; Semble contra, People v. Spohr, ......