People v. Sparks

• Decision Date: 30 March 2017
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Yusuf SPARKS, Appellant.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

29 N.Y.3d 932
73 N.E.3d 354
51 N.Y.S.3d 14

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Yusuf SPARKS, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

March 30, 2017.

51 N.Y.S.3d 14

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York City (Andrew J. Dalack of counsel), for appellant.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York City (Susan Gliner and Alan Gadlin of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.

29 N.Y.3d 933

73 N.E.3d 354

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

51 N.Y.S.3d 15

73 N.E.3d 355

Defendant was charged with one count of assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10[1] ) following a dispute at a Manhattan bodega. Defendant, then age 19, and the victim, a 50–year–old man with a long history of substance abuse and criminal activity, had a verbal exchange inside the bodega after the victim provoked defendant. Based on that affront, defendant twice threatened to "murder" the victim, who was in an inebriated, stumbling state, before eventually punching him inside that store. In defendant's words, the punch "knocked [the victim] out."

The surveillance footage that was admitted into evidence at the jury trial contains images of what happened outside the bodega after defendant punched the victim. In sum, after defendant struck the victim, defendant and the victim separately left the immediate vicinity of that store on foot. A few minutes later, the footage reflects that defendant reentered the bodega; soon thereafter, the victim returned to the area immediately outside that store and stumbled about. Inside the bodega, defendant asked the shopkeeper for a stick,¹ but the shopkeeper refused that request, saying that the punch was "enough for [the victim]." Defendant, however, told the shopkeeper that he

29 N.Y.3d 934

was going to walk outside and "knock [the victim] out again."

The surveillance footage reflects that defendant did exactly that. As he walked out of the bodega, defendant struck the unsuspecting victim in the face with a milk crate. The blow knocked the victim to the sidewalk, and defendant walked away from that store. The victim, however, was taken by ambulance to a hospital, where he was determined to have a broken nose and cheekbone, and where he received potentially lifesaving treatment for a traumatic brain injury.

Following the trial, defendant was convicted of the lesser included offense of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05[2] ). On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the judgment of conviction (132 A.D.3d 513, 17 N.Y.S.3d 423 [1st Dept.2015] ). A Judge of this Court granted defendant leave to appeal (26 N.Y.3d 1092, 23 N.Y.S.3d 649, 44 N.E.3d 947 [2015] ), and we now affirm the Appellate Division order.

Contrary to defendant's contention, the trial court properly refused to instruct the jury on the defense of justification. Viewing the record in the light most favorable to defendant, as we must (see People v. Watts, 57 N.Y.2d 299, 301, 456...