People v. Pendleton

Citation42 A.D.2d 144,345 N.Y.S.2d 773
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Edwin C. PENDLETON, Respondent.
Decision Date06 July 1973
CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division

Stephen R. Sirkin, Dist. Atty., Lyons, for appellant.

Robert F. Zecher, Sodus, for respondent.

Before GOLDMAN, P.J., and WITMER, MOULE, CARDAMONE and SIMONS, JJ.

WITMER, Justice:

The question presented on this appeal is whether the trial court erred in granting an order of dismissal at the end of the People's case, on the ground that the evidence adduced by the People, apart from defendant's confession of the slaying, was insufficient corroboration to present a question of fact as to whether the deceased died as the result of a criminal act.

Defendant was indicted for the crime of murder in violation of subdivision 1 of section 125.25 of the Penal Law in that 'on or about August 26, 1972, with intent to cause the death of Virginia Pendleton' he caused her death 'by striking with his hands'. On August 26, 1972 and on the next day defendant was interrogated by the police who also interviewed other persons in connection with their investigation in this case. It was ascertained that on the evening of August 25 defendant and his wife, Virginia Pendleton, held a clambake at their home to which were invited ten other persons, including the defendant's brother Eric and wife Georgia, friends William Erickson and Pauline Griffin, and also Ronald Blaisdell (Virginia's son by a prior marriage) and his wife Kathy, and Cheryl Blaisdell (Virginia's daughter by that prior marriage, who lived with defendant and Virginia) and her boyfriend James Gonyeau. In preparation for the clambake defendant had dug a pit 4 3 long by 3 3 wide and 18 deep, lined on the bottom with bricks, which pit was about 63 feet from the house. There was a downward slope from the house to the pit and beyond the pit from the house was a marsh. Defendant had built a fire in the pit and during the day of the bake the ingredients thereof were cooking.

After the dinner the guests and hosts sat around the fire at the pit finishing up a keg of beer. At about 1:00 A.M. on August 26 they ran out of beer, and defendand and Virginia, Erie and Georgia in one automobile and William Erickson and Pauline Griffin in another left for an entertainment club. The Blaisdells and James Gonyeau left for home shortly thereafter, and Cheryl turned out the lights and went to bed. After an hour or so at the entertainment club, at which they each had a couple of drinks and defendant slept a good deal, William Erickson and Pauline Griffin left for her home and defendant and Virginia, Eric and Georgia returned to defendant's residence, arriving there a little after 2:00 A.M., and they sat around the fire pit. Defendant and Eric both slept in chairs there and Virginia and Georgia drank 'Pussycats'. Eric awoke a little after 4:00 A.M. and he and Georgia left for home, leaving Virginia lying on a chaise lounge and defendant sleeping in a lounge lawn chair, both near the fire pit.

The police arrived at defendant's home a little after 6:30 P.M. on August 26 in response to a call that Virginia was missing. In answer to police questions defendant at first denied knowing of Virginia's whereabouts, telling them that he recalled seeing her near the fire pit at about 2:30 A.M. that day. In the afternoon of that day Virginia's son, Ronald, had come to the residence and helped search for Virginia. At 7:30 P.M. Ronald discovered bones in the fire pit, including that appeared to be a human skull adhering to a partially burned log, which he had turned over. The coroner was then called and he carefully examined the bones and indentified them to be from a human doby.

When confronted with this information defendant gradually revealed knowledge of Virginia's disappearance, and finally confessed to striking her with his hands, putting her body in the pit and cremating her. At an early point in his statement to the police defendant said that he awoke at 5:00 A.M. beside the pit, smalled something burning, found that the chaise lounge mattress (on which Virginia had been lying when Eric and Georgia left a short time before) was afire and he got up, picked it up and threw it onto the fire in the pit. He then asked the officer, rhetorically, 'Could she have been on the mattress, could I have done it?' Thereafter he told the police that he 'felt that Virginia was in that pit, in the fire pit', that he recalled seeing her in the pit, on fire, and said that he then put the mattress on top of her and sat down by the pit for a few minutes and watched the fire burn; and then he went to the nearby woodpile, making three or four trisp, and got logs and put them on top of her body.

The police asked defendant how Virginia's body got into the pit. He replied that when he awoke he saw Virginia come walking down the slope from behind the house and the asked her where she had been. He replied, 'no place.' He began to argue with her about this and he grabbed her with his left hand and struck her, and she fell. He then picked up her body and placed it in the fire pit. He stated that embers from the fire were caused to land on the chaise lounge mattress which began to burn, and so he picked it up and put it on top of Virginia's burning body in the pit. He said that he knew that his wife was dead when he put her in the pit; otherwise he could not have done it.

A little later he told the police that when he awoke near the fire pit Virginia was not there and he searched for her in vain, and on returning to the pit, he found her near it. He then asked her where she had been and when she replied, 'no place', they argued and he struck her and placed her body in the fire pit.

Evidence was introduced in the People's case that when Virginia drank intoxicants she would become unsteady on her feet and was inclined to fall; that she did fall while dancing that night at the entertainment club; and that while sitting on a chair near the pit that morning she fell off, which caused Eric to make up. Georgia testified that after the four of them returned to defendant's residence from the entertainment club, Virginia and Georgia drank alcoholic drinks, Pussycats, which were made in the house. She testified that on two occasions that morning Virginia carried two such drinks from the house, one in each hand, and brought them out to drink with Georgia near the fire. Georgia also testified that when Virginia walked up the slope to enter the house she did so without assistance.

There was evidence that when Eric and Georgia decided to leave for home that morning Virginia said that she was going with them, and said that, 'she just had to go'; but upon their insistence she lay down on the chaise lounge. When they left, that chair and the lawn chair upon which defendant was sleeping were nearer to the pit than they were the next forenoon, as shown in the photographs taken that next day. Also, when they left, the fire in the pit had died down to a bed of red hot coals.

None of the guests who testified heard any argument between defendant and Virginia that night but, to the contrary, there was evidence that defendant was very solicitous of her.

Virginia's daughter, Cheryl, testified that she woke up and got up at 7:00 A.M. on Saturday morning, August 26, on hearing an automobile slow down and drive it. It was defendant returning home, and she saw him then enter the living room from the porch. Defendant said, 'Good morning', to Cheryl but did not inquire about Virginia; and when Cheryl asked him 'where everybody was', 'he said that he didn't know', and said nothing else about Virginia. At 7:30 A.M. she noticed that the pit was burning--she saw flames in it, but she saw no one put anything on the fire that morning. At 9:00 A.M. Cheryl went with defendant to get beer. On cross-examination Cherly said that defendant told her that he had gone to Eric's home early that morning looking for Virginia; that William Erickson telephoned defendant from Eric's home, and defendant and Cheryl drove to Eric's house after stopping for the beer; and that on being told at Eric's house that Virginia wasn't there, defendant 'looked very concerned'.

Pauline Griffin testified that at about 6:30 A.M. after the party defendant telephoned her and asked whether Virginia was there and also whether William Erickson was there, and that she answered 'no' to both questions. She said, however, that in fact William Erickson was there. Before 10:00 A.M. Pauline and William went over to Eric's house and told Eric and Georgia about defendant's 6:30 A.M. telephone call to Pauline. William Erickson then called defendant on Eric's telephone. Erickson reported to them that defendant said that he was going to get some beer and would then come over to Eric's. Defendant and Cheryl arrived at Eric's house at about 10:00 A.M. with two six-packs of beer. Pauline testified that when defendant arrived at Eric's home there was no conversation about Virginia until after Pauline asked him where Virginia was, and Pauline did not say what defendant replied. On cross-examination Pauline said that when defendant was asked at Eric's home where Virginia was, he answered, 'Here'. Georgia testified that when defendant and Cheryl arrived at her home that morning they assumed that Virginia was there and asked for her.

All six of these persons then returned to defendant's place and hunted for Virginia. Besides looking in the house, barn, marsh and roads, they looked into the clamback pit. Defendant had told them that the mattress had burned and they saw the outline of its burned-out remains on the fire with only a little smoke arising...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • People ex rel. Pendleton v. Smith
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 5 Noviembre 1976
    ...and (3) relator's constitutional right to be free from double jeopardy was not violated by his retrial following our reversal (42 A.D.2d 144, 345 N.Y.S.2d 773) of a trial order of Relator was indicted for the crime of murder in violation of subdivision 1 of section 125.25 of the Penal Law a......
  • People ex rel. Pendleton v. Smith, C--50
    • United States
    • New York County Court
    • 16 Julio 1975
    ...an appeal 'as of right by the people from . . . a trial order of dismissal.' On the appeal, the Appellate Division (People v. Pendleton, 42 A.D.2d 144, 345 N.Y.S.2d 773) overruled the trial judge's dismissal and found that there was sufficient evidence for the case for go to the jury. The C......
  • Robinson v. Smith, CIV-77-300E.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of New York
    • 9 Febrero 1982
    ...in addition to a defendant's confession must establish that a killing occurred through a criminal agency." People v. Pendleton, 42 A.D.2d 144, 148, 345 N.Y.S.2d 773 (4th Dep't 1973). Because the coroner relied on Mary Taylor's written version of petitioner's admission to conclude that the v......
  • People v. Douglas
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 29 Noviembre 1973
    ...law (People v. Reade, 13 N.Y.2d 42, 241 N.Y.S.2d 829, 191 N.E.2d 891; People v. Taleisnik, 225 N.Y. 489, 122 N.E. 615; People v. Pendleton, 42 A.D.2d 144, 345 N.Y.S.2d 773). However, the problem is that, although the defendant's statement may have had some bearing on the issue of intent, it......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT