People v. Williams

Decision Date22 August 2019
Docket Number581,KA 18–00728
Citation175 A.D.3d 980,108 N.Y.S.3d 584
Parties The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Shala WILLIAMS, Defendant–Appellant. (Appeal No. 2.)
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

175 A.D.3d 980
108 N.Y.S.3d 584

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Shala WILLIAMS, Defendant–Appellant.
(Appeal No. 2.)

581
KA 18–00728

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

Entered: August 22, 2019


JOHN R. LEWIS, SLEEPY HOLLOW, FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (KENNETH H. TYLER, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, CARNI, NEMOYER, AND CURRAN, JJ.

108 N.Y.S.3d 585

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law and the matter is remitted to Onondaga County Court for a hearing pursuant to CPL 440.30(5) in accordance with the following memorandum: In appeal No. 1, defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon

175 A.D.3d 981

a jury verdict of, inter alia, murder in the second degree ( Penal Law § 125.25[1] ). In appeal No. 2, defendant appeals from an order denying his CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment of conviction on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Defendant contends in appeal No. 1 that County Court (Fahey, J.) erred in determining, following a Sirois hearing, that the People "demonstrate[d] by clear and convincing evidence that [he] engaged in misconduct aimed at least in part at preventing [a] witness from testifying and that those misdeeds were a significant cause of the witness's decision not to testify" ( People v. Smart , 23 N.Y.3d 213, 220, 989 N.Y.S.2d 631, 12 N.E.3d 1061 [2014] ) and that, consequently, the court erred in permitting the prosecution to elicit testimony concerning hearsay statements attributed to that witness in its direct case (see generally People v. Geraci , 85 N.Y.2d 359, 365–367, 625 N.Y.S.2d 469, 649 N.E.2d 817 [1995] ; People v. Vernon , 136 A.D.3d 1276, 1277–1278, 25 N.Y.S.3d 755 [4th Dept. 2016], lv. denied 27 N.Y.3d 1076, 38 N.Y.S.3d 846, 60 N.E.3d 1212 [2016] ). We reject that contention. The court found that the witness, while testifying at the Sirois hearing, appeared "agitated, anxious, uncomfortable and evasive." The court also credited the testimony of a law enforcement officer that, according to the witness, defendant confronted the witness with a photograph of that witness approximately one week prior to trial and informed him that defendant was aware of the witness's upcoming testimony, and the witness asserted afterward that he would not testify. We further reject defendant's contention that the hearsay statement attributed to the witness at trial regarding defendant's purported admission to him was "so devoid of reliability as to offend due process" ( People v. Cotto , 92...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Rodriguez v. State Univ. of N.Y. at Buffalo
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • March 19, 2021
    ...at Albany , 116 A.D.3d 1292, 1294, 984 N.Y.S.2d 234 [3d Dept. 2014], lv denied 23 N.Y.3d 908, 2014 WL 2936283 [2014] ; see Brucato , 175 A.D.3d at 980, 108 N.Y.S.3d 581 ; Sharma , 170 A.D.3d at 1567, 95 N.Y.S.3d 691...
  • People v. Meyers
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • November 20, 2020
    ...outside the record on direct appeal and, as a result, must be raised in a CPL 440.10 motion (see e.g. People v. Williams [appeal No. 2], 175 A.D.3d 980, 981, 108 N.Y.S.3d 584 [4th Dept. 2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 1020, 114 N.Y.S.3d 744, 138 N.E.3d 473 [2019] ; 188 A.D.3d 1735 People v. Almo......
  • Brucato v. State Univ. of N.Y. At Buffalo
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • August 22, 2019
    ...evidence. The evidence considered by respondent constituted " ‘such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate 175 A.D.3d 980 to support [the] conclusion’ " that petitioner violated respondent's student code as charged by respondent ( Sharma , 170 A.D.3d at 1567, 95 N.Y.S.3d......
  • People v. Barkley
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • January 28, 2022
    ...not to testify" ( People v. Smart , 23 N.Y.3d 213, 220, 989 N.Y.S.2d 631, 12 N.E.3d 1061 [2014] ; see People v. Williams [appeal No. 2], 175 A.D.3d 980, 981, 108 N.Y.S.3d 584 [4th Dept. 2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 1020, 114 N.Y.S.3d 744, 138 N.E.3d 473 [2019] ; People v. Vernon , 136 A.D.3d ......
  • 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