People v. Peters

• Decision Date: 05 March 2015
• Docket Number: 105064
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Brion L. PETERS, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

126 A.D.3d 1029
3 N.Y.S.3d 462
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 01829

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent
v.
Brion L. PETERS, Appellant.

105064

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

March 5, 2015.

3 N.Y.S.3d 463

Mitch Kessler, Cohoes, for appellant.

Weeden A. Wetmore, District Attorney, Elmira (Susan Rider–Ulacco of counsel), for respondent.

Before: PETERS, P.J., ROSE, EGAN JR. and CLARK, JJ.

Opinion

PETERS, P.J.

126 A.D.3d 1029

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Hayden, J.), rendered March 9, 2012, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of manslaughter in the second degree and unlawful manufacture of methamphetamine in the third degree.

In the early morning hours of May 8, 2011, defendant and Gary Varlan were manufacturing crystal methamphetamine in a remote cabin in Chemung County. In so doing, they placed three plastic pitchers containing lantern fuel on a lit wood-burning stove. The fuel ignited, causing a fire that burned the cabin to the ground. While all four of the cabin's occupants exited the building, the victim later died in the hospital as a result of severe burns covering the majority of her body. Defendant was thereafter charged with manslaughter in the second degree and unlawful manufacture of methamphetamine in the third degree and, following a jury trial, was convicted of both charges. He appeals, challenging the legal sufficiency and weight of the evidence supporting his conviction of manslaughter in the second degree.

Defendant specifically asserts that the People failed to establish that he caused the victim's death, as the evidence did not exclude the possibility that the fire resulted from a third party opening the wood stove door. Defendant further argues that the evidence is legally insufficient to prove that his actions

126 A.D.3d 1030

were reckless, as he was assured by Varlan that placing a pitcher of fuel on the wood stove was safe. In conducting

3 N.Y.S.3d 464

a legal sufficiency review, “we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the People and will not disturb the verdict so long as the evidence demonstrates a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences that could lead a rational person to the conclusion reached by the jury” (People v. Peryea, 68 A.D.3d 1144, 1146, 889 N.Y.S.2d 741 [2009], lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 804, 899 N.Y.S.2d 138, 925 N.E.2d 942 [2010] [citations omitted]; see People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672 [1987] ; People v. Barreto, 64 A.D.3d 1046, 1048, 882 N.Y.S.2d 594 [2009], lv. denied 13 N.Y.3d 834, 890 N.Y.S.2d 450, 918 N.E.2d 965 [2009] ). “A person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when [he or she] recklessly causes the death of another person” (Penal Law § 125.15[1] ; see People v. Heslop, 48 A.D.3d 190, 195, 849 N.Y.S.2d 301 [2007], lv. denied 10 N.Y.3d 935, 862 N.Y.S.2d 342, 892 N.E.2d 408 [2008] ). Recklessness in this context requires that a person be “aware of and consciously disregard[ ] a substantial and unjustifiable risk” of death (Penal Law § 15.05[3] ; see People v. Hartman, 4 A.D.3d 22, 24, 772 N.Y.S.2d 396 [2004] ).

The trial evidence established that defendant, Varlan, Brian Yontz and the victim were at Varlan's cabin and had used methamphetamine. In the hours before the fire erupted, defendant and Varlan proceeded to the basement to make a batch of crystal methamphetamine. Varlan then brought two...