The defendant is appealing a judgment made by the Supreme Court in Albany County. The judgment convicted the defendant of murder in the second degree, conspiracy in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.
The girlfriend of the defendant was shot in the head and killed. In connection with the murder, the defendant was charged with murder in the second degree, manslaughter in the first degree, conspiracy in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.
As a part of the same indictment, the defendant was also charged with criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree for being in possession of two handguns that were apparently not used in the murder.
The defendant motioned to have those two counts severed from the indictment, but this motion was denied by the Supreme Court.
At the end of the trial, the jury acquitted the defendant of the count of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree for a handgun unrelated to the murder, the lesser manslaughter count was not included, and the defendant was convicted on the other counts of the indictment. The defendant is appealing.
The defendant argues that the supreme court abused its discretion by refusing to sever the two counts of the indictment. However, the court finds that the Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in the matter. The counts were properly joined because they were defined by the same or similar statutory provisions as the count for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree related to the handgun that was used to commit the murder.
The jury acquitted the defendant of one of the weapon charges, which showed that they could separately consider proof on each of the counts of the indictment.
The defendant further argues that the evidence was not legally sufficient to support the verdict. When reviewing the evidence of the case, the evidence is found to be legally sufficient to confirm the jury’s convictions for the counts in the indictment.
Even though the defendant testified that he did not own the handguns in question, there were several officers that offered testimony stating that the defendant confessed to the white collar crime. The defendant admitted that he and another individual had planned to kill the victim and that the defendant shot her with a .357 Magnum handgun. While a person cannot be convicted solely on his or her own confession without additional proof, the corroborating proof does not have to establish guilt or every detail of the crime.
The evidence in this case supported the verdict and the other arguments made by the defendant in the case are found to be without merit. The judgment made in the Supreme Court is affirmed.
If you need to speak with an attorney regarding a legal issue call Stephen Bilkis & Associates at 1-800-NY-NY-LAW (1-800-696-9529). We have offices located around New York City for your convenience. Call us today to make an appointment for your free consultation with one of our expert New York attorneys.