The People v Jaleel Hewitt
Categories
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Criminal law issue concerning whether the evidence was legally sufficient to prove that the defendant joined a murder conspiracy and criminally facilitated murder during an alleged retaliatory gang shooting that resulted in a bystander's death.
The Supreme Court, Richmond County, entered judgment on a jury verdict convicting the defendant of conspiracy in the second degree and criminal facilitation in the second degree, and imposed sentence.
The Appellate Division reversed the judgment, dismissed the indictment insofar as asserted against the defendant, and remitted the matter for proceedings consistent with CPL 160.50.
The People failed to prove the elements required by Penal Law § 105.15 [conspiracy in the second degree requires proof that, with intent that conduct constituting a class A felony be performed, the defendant agreed with one or more persons to engage in or cause that conduct] and Penal Law § 115.05 [criminal facilitation in the second degree requires proof, among other things, that the defendant believed he was rendering aid to a person who intended to commit a class A felony]. Although the evidence showed retaliation against rival gang members, it did not establish that the defendant knew his codefendants were armed, knew they intended to commit murder in the second degree, or specifically joined a plan to commit murder.
Background
After a purported fellow gang member was killed by a rival gang member, the defendant arrived at the scene, made a brief call to codefendant Isaiah Kelson, and later encountered a vehicle driven by codefendant Isaiah Richardson with Kelson and Sean Oliveras as passengers. The defendant then turned around and followed that vehicle. Trial evidence showed Facetime communications in which the defendant said he was looking for rival gang members and Kelson told him to follow the vehicle. The defendant continued following the vehicle to a location where Kelson and Oliveras spotted and shot at a rival gang member, instead fatally striking a bystander, and then followed the vehicle afterward to West Brighton.
Lower Court Decision
The trial court denied the defendant's timely motion for a trial order of dismissal, and the jury found him guilty of conspiracy in the second degree and criminal facilitation in the second degree based on the theory that he conspired to commit, and facilitated, murder in the second degree.
Appellate Division Reversal
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, the Appellate Division held it was legally insufficient to support either conviction. For conspiracy, the court ruled that the People did not prove the defendant had the specific intent to commit murder in the second degree or that he agreed to a plan whose objective was murder. For facilitation, the court held the People did not prove that the defendant believed he was aiding someone who intended to commit murder. Because the proof showed, at most, participation in retaliatory conduct rather than a proven agreement or belief directed toward murder, the court held that the trial court should have granted the motion for a trial order of dismissal.
Legal Significance
The decision reinforces that when the charged object felony is murder in the second degree, a conspiracy or facilitation conviction cannot rest on generalized participation in gang retaliation or presence around the perpetrators. The prosecution must present evidence that the defendant specifically intended the murder or believed he was aiding a person who intended murder, not merely evidence of association, pursuit, or post-event conduct.
Evidence that a defendant helped locate or follow rivals during a retaliatory episode is not enough to sustain convictions for conspiracy to commit murder or criminal facilitation of murder without proof that he knew of, shared, or believed in the shooters' murderous intent.