Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ronald BODFORD, Appellant.
We reject the contention of defendant that County Court's reasonable doubt instruction deprived him of due process and a fair trial.
Because there is no evidence from which the jury could conclude that defendant reasonably believed that the victim was about to use deadly physical force, the court properly refused defendant's request to charge the defense of justification (see, People v. Watts, 57 N.Y.2d 299, 301-302, 456 N.Y.S.2d 677, 442 N.E.2d 1188).
Upon our review of the record, we conclude that the conviction of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05[4] ) is not based on legally sufficient evidence. One of the victims sustained a physical injury when defendant shot him in the foot (see, Penal Law § 10.00[9] ). The People, however, failed to establish that the injury created a substantial risk of death or that it caused serious and protracted disfigurement, protracted impairment of health or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ (see, Penal Law § 10.00[10]; § 120.05[4] ). Consequently, we modify the judgment as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice by reducing the conviction of assault in the second degree to assault in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.00[2] ), a class A misdemeanor, vacating the sentence imposed thereon and sentencing defendant to a term of incarceration of one year for assault in the third degree (see, Penal Law § 70.15[1]; People v. Snipes, 112 A.D.2d 810, 812, 492 N.Y.S.2d 401).
Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice and as modified affirmed.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: April 25, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)