Judges

Attorneys and Parties

Brief Summary

Background

In November 2022, Albany police found victim A running down the street engulfed in flames. Evidence showed that someone came up behind her, poured a flame accelerant on her, and ignited it. Victim A and a bystander, both of whom knew defendant as their drug dealer, identified defendant as the attacker. In February 2023, defendant brought his then-girlfriend, victim B, to the emergency room with second- and third-degree burns. Victim B later stated that defendant heated a pan and burned her with it, and that he had threatened to use on her the same accelerant bottle he had used on victim A. A single indictment charged defendant with crimes relating to both victims.

Lower Court Decision

County Court of Albany County convicted defendant of attempted murder in the first degree, attempted murder in the second degree, and two counts of assault in the first degree. As a second felony offender, he received 25 years to life on the first-degree attempted murder count, and 25-year determinate terms plus five years of postrelease supervision on each remaining count. The sentences for the three victim A counts were concurrent with each other but consecutive to the sentence for the victim B assault count, producing an aggregate prison term of 50 years to life.

Appellate Division Reversal

The Appellate Division modified the judgment by reversing the conviction for attempted murder in the first degree on the facts, dismissing count 1, and vacating that sentence. The court otherwise affirmed. It held that the remaining counts were supported by legally sufficient evidence and by the weight of the evidence as to identity. It also upheld admission of victim B's grand jury testimony after concluding, following a Sirois hearing, that the People proved by clear and convincing evidence that defendant, acting with others including his uncle, caused victim B's unavailability through threats and coordinated misconduct after receiving discovery and discussing preventing her testimony.

Legal Significance

The decision applies People v Estrella, 41 NY3d 514 (2024), to limit the torture-murder theory in attempted first-degree murder cases. The court emphasized that the required course of conduct must consist of a series of distinct acts before death or attempted death that both are intended to inflict and actually inflict extreme physical pain; psychological terror or preparatory acts are not enough. The case also reinforces that under People v Geraci and People v Cotto, forfeiture of confrontation rights may be established through circumstantial evidence showing that a defendant procured a witness's absence, and that a material witness order is not required where the People otherwise meet their burden.