People v. Williams

• Decision Date: 10 May 2018
• Docket Number: 107911
• Citation: 77 N.Y.S.3d 216,161 A.D.3d 1296
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Talisha V. WILLIAMS, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

161 A.D.3d 1296
77 N.Y.S.3d 216

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Talisha V. WILLIAMS, Appellant.

107911

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

Calendar Date: March 30, 2018
Decided and Entered: May 10, 2018

77 N.Y.S.3d 217

Teresa C. Mulliken, Harpersfield, for appellant.

Weeden A. Wetmore, District Attorney, Elmira (William D. VanDerlinder of counsel), for respondent.

Before: McCarthy, J.P., Clark, Mulvey, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

McCarthy, J.P.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Hayden, J.), rendered August 24, 2015, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of assault in the second degree.

Defendant was charged in a two-count indictment with attempted assault in the first degree and assault in the second degree. Following a trial, the jury found defendant guilty of assault in the second degree. County Court sentenced her, as a second felony offender, to five years in prison with five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant appeals.

Defendant did not exercise a for-cause or peremptory challenge to juror No. 9 or otherwise object to County Court's questioning of her or her being seated as a juror. Thus, defendant's current arguments concerning that juror are not preserved for our review (see People v. Colburn, 123 A.D.3d 1292, 1295, 998 N.Y.S.2d 257 [2014], lv denied 25 N.Y.3d 950, 7 N.Y.S.3d 279, 30 N.E.3d 170 [2015] ).

The jury's verdict, including its rejection of defendant's justification defense, was not against the weight of the evidence. Given that another verdict would not have been unreasonable, we "must weigh the relative probative force of conflicting testimony and the relative strength of the conflicting inferences that may be drawn from the testimony while viewing the evidence in a neutral light and giving deference to the jury's credibility assessments" ( People v. Johnson, 91 A.D.3d 1194, 1196, 937 N.Y.S.2d 443 [2012] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted], lv denied 18 N.Y.3d 995, 945 N.Y.S.2d 649, 968 N.E.2d 1005 [2012] ; see People v. Green, 121 A.D.3d 1294, 1294–1295, 994 N.Y.S.2d 716 [2014], lv denied 25 N.Y.3d 1164, 15 N.Y.S.3d 296, 36 N.E.3d 99 [2015] ). As relevant here, "[a] person is guilty of assault in the second degree when ... [w]ith intent to cause physical injury to another person, he [or she] causes such injury to such person ... by means of a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument" ( Penal Law § 120.05[2] ). Regarding the defense of justification, unless the defendant is the initial aggressor, he or she may "use physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself, herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person" ( Penal Law § 35.15[1] ). However, "[a] person may not use deadly physical force upon another person" unless he or she "reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force" ( Penal Law § 35.15[2][a] ). When the defense of justification is asserted, the People must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's actions were not justified (see Penal Law § 25.00[1] ;

77 N.Y.S.3d 218

People v. Hamilton, 133 A.D.3d 1090, 1091, 20 N.Y.S.3d 676 [2015] ).

It is undisputed that defendant struck the victim in the face with an object, causing an injury that required 21 sutures. Defendant testified that she was scared of the victim, who had...