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.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. ANTWON OWENS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously modified as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice by reducing the sentence to an indeterminate term of incarceration of 25 years to life imprisonment and as modified the judgment is affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of murder in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.27[1][a][vii]; [b] ). The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621), is legally sufficient to support the conviction (see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495). “There was sufficient evidence from which a rational trier of fact could have found that the defendant, with the intent to kill, shot the victim once, causing a wound [that] contributed to his death, during the course of, and in furtherance of, [an attempted] robbery” (People v. Harrell, 5 AD3d 503, 504, lv denied 3 NY3d 641; see People v. Garcia, 45 AD3d 859, lv denied 10 NY3d 765). Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime as charged to the jury (see People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349), we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. VanDyne, 63 AD3d 1681, 1682, lv denied 14 NY3d 845; see generally Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d at 495). Contrary to the contention of defendant, County Court properly refused to suppress his statement to the police. The record belies the contention of defendant that his statement was the product of coercive interrogation techniques that created a substantial risk that he might falsely incriminate himself and thus rendered his statement involuntary (see CPL 60.45[1], [2][b][i]; People v. Jacques, 158 A.D.2d 949, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 967). We agree with defendant, however, that the sentence of life imprisonment without parole is unduly harsh and severe. Thus, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15[6][b] ), we modify the judgment by reducing the sentence to an indeterminate term of incarceration of 25 years to life imprisonment.
Patricia L. Morgan
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: KA 07-00578
Decided: November 12, 2010
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)