People v. Watt, 12676
| Decision Date | 22 December 2020 |
| Docket Number | 12676,Index No. 5224/14,Case No. 2018-2739 |
| Citation | 137 N.Y.S.3d 37,189 A.D.3d 637 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Kevon WATT, Defendant–Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Emilia King-Musza of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Nathan Shi of counsel), for respondent.
Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Gesmer, Kern, Oing, Moulton, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel Fitzgerald, J.), rendered September 19, 2017, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted murder in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110, 125.25[1] ) and robbery in the first degree ( Penal Law § 160.15[1] ), and sentencing him to two concurrent terms of 14 years in prison, to be followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision, modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the concurrent prison terms to 10 years, and otherwise affirmed.
We reduce defendant's sentence under our interest of justice powers, as we do not find an abuse of discretion by the sentencing judge. We also do so mindful of the horrific nature of the crime, described more fully below. Notwithstanding that, we reduce his sentence in view of defendant's significant personal limitations, which we conclude would make it unjust for him to be sentenced to a longer period of incarceration than two of his codefendants.
The following history is gleaned from the record before us, which contains, among other items, defendant's CPL article 730 examinations and other psychological evaluative reports: Since his childhood, defendant's life has been plagued by mental illness and intellectual disability. At the age of five, defendant was diagnosed with ADHD and an emotional disturbance. Beginning in the first grade, he started attending special educational schools. At seven, he was prescribed antidepressant medication often used to treat anxiety. At eight, he began taking an antipsychotic medication normally prescribed to treat schizophrenia and symptoms of bipolar disorder. At nine, defendant began having auditory hallucinations. At 15, he started high school and began getting into fights with other students who purportedly picked on him. One such fight ended with defendant's arrest and an adjudication as a youthful offender. At 16, he was diagnosed with selective mutism, a childhood anxiety disorder characterized by a child's inability to effectively speak and communicate in social settings. At 17, he underwent a psychological evaluation and was assessed a full scale IQ score of 48, which, according to the evaluating doctor, was "well below the 1st percentile, placing his level of cognitive functioning within the Moderate Mental Retardation range." The evaluation also noted that defendant possessed a second grade reading level. That same year, the New York City Department of Education amended defendant's educational program to provide for only home school instruction. He would never return to a school building. It was around this time that defendant started spending time with individuals from his community, including codefendant Christian Torres, who held himself out as a friend to defendant. Defendant soon began drinking heavily, reportedly at the urging of his companions, and was hospitalized on one occasion for alcohol poisoning.
On the night of November 6, 2014, defendant, then 19, and his codefendants, Torres, Alexis Reddrick, and Whitney Byrd, went to Riverside Park, where they encountered a man sitting on a bench. The four surrounded the man, and Torres smashed a large rock on his head. All four codefendants then kicked the man. Someone in the group took the man's iPhone, laptop, and wallet. The man suffered bleeding to the brain, a broken nose, facial fractures, and an open wound on the back of his head requiring 15 stitches. The group then walked further into the park, where they saw a homeless man sleeping on a park bench. Torres hit the man in the face and all four repeatedly hit the man. The man was then thrown into the Hudson River where the group threw rocks at him. The man was able to cling onto a riverbank overnight and was rescued in the morning. He suffered a broken jaw, broken leg, multiple abrasions, and hypothermia, which required a month-long stay in the hospital.
A grand jury charged defendant, Torres, Reddrick, and Byrd with two counts each of attempted murder in the second degree, gang assault in the first degree ( Penal Law § 120.07 ), assault in the first degree ( Penal Law § 120.10 ), robbery in the first degree, and robbery in the second degree ( Penal Law § 160.10[1] ), and one count each of grand larceny in the fourth degree ( Penal Law § 155.30[4] ).
While awaiting trial, defendant was detained in a mental observation unit on Rikers Island and underwent two CPL article 730 examinations. Rikers designated him as someone with "a severe and persistent mental illness" and diagnosed him with "Mood Disorder NOS, Psychiatric Disorder Problem, Impulse Control Disorder NOS, Adjusting Disorder with Anxiety/Depression, Bipolar Disorder NOS." He told his CPL article 730 examiners that, since being at Rikers, he had attempted suicide 35 times using methods like cutting his wrists with a broken cup, punching himself in the face, and repeatedly banging his head against the wall. He stated that he continued to hear the voices that had plagued him since his childhood, despite being prescribed antipsychotic medication.
As noted above, defendant pled guilty to attempted murder in the second degree and robbery in the first degree and was sentenced to 14 years in prison followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision. Torres pled guilty to two counts of attempted murder in the first degree and was sentenced to an aggregate prison term of 14 years in prison followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision. Reddick and Byrd each pled guilty to two counts of robbery in the first degree and were each sentenced to an aggregate prison term of 10 years in prison followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision.
We now reduce defendant's prison sentence to 10 years and otherwise affirm. (see People v. Rosenthal, 305 A.D.2d 327, 329, 760 N.Y.S.2d 460 [1st Dept. 2003] [], citing People v. Delgado, 80 N.Y.2d 780, 783, 587 N.Y.S.2d 271, 599 N.E.2d 675 [1992] ).
This Court takes very seriously the severity of the injuries inflicted on the two victims in this case, and our reduction of defendant's prison sentence in no way diminishes our horror at the pain and suffering they endured at the hands of defendant and his codefendants. However, based on the record before us, we find that defendant presents an extraordinary circumstance meriting the use of our interest of justice powers to reduce his prison sentence.
First, the record unequivocally shows that defendant has suffered intellectual and mental deficiencies since his childhood, which our Court has held renders a defendant's conduct less blameworthy (see People v. Reyes, 89 A.D.3d 401, 931 N.Y.S.2d 601 [1st Dept. 2011] [] ); see also People v. Nealon, 36 A.D.3d 1076, 1079, 827 N.Y.S.2d 359 [3d Dept. 2007], lv denied 8 N.Y.3d 988, 838 N.Y.S.2d 492, 869 N.E.2d 668 [2007] [] ). Second, defendant's cognitive disabilities rendered him overly susceptible to influence and manipulation (see People v. Patillo, 185 A.D.3d 46, 50, 126 N.Y.S.3d 127 [1st Dept. 2020] [citation omitted] ["People with intellectual disabilities are, by virtue of their disability, easily confused, suggestible, and susceptible to manipulation"] ). Here, prior to the incident defendant had no felony or misdemeanor convictions and only one youthful offender adjudication stemming from a school fight. For the first 19 years of his life, defendant exhibited no inclination towards committing crime, let alone violent crime. This strongly suggests that defendant's association with codefendant Torres, which began just one to two years prior to the incident, played an outsize influence on defendant and his role in the attacks. Third, defendant was 19 at the time of the incident, which, in combination with his cognitive deficiencies, rendered him even more susceptible to negative influences (see Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 569, 125 S.Ct. 1183, 161 L.Ed.2d 1 [2005] [...
To continue reading
Request your trial