| People v Taylor |
| 2015 NY Slip Op 09206 [134 AD3d 508] |
| December 15, 2015 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Abdul Taylor, Appellant. |
Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Laura Lieberman Cohen ofcounsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Patricia Curran of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Juan Merchan, J.), renderedNovember 20, 2009, as amended February 11 and 24, 2010, convicting defendant, after ajury trial, of attempted murder in the second degree (two counts), assault in the firstdegree (two counts), attempted assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree(two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and criminal mischiefin the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to anaggregate term of 22 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in theinterest of justice, to the extent of vacating the first-degree assault conviction under countsix of the indictment and dismissing that count, and otherwise affirmed.
Defendant's legal sufficiency claim is unpreserved and we decline to review it in theinterest of justice except to the extent indicated. As an alternative holding, we find,except to the extent indicated, that the verdict was based on legally sufficient evidenceand was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). Theevidence supports the inference that defendant intended to kill two bouncers who wereejecting him from a club. Defendant repeatedly stabbed one of the bouncers in vitalorgans, and stabbed the other bouncer in the leg before chasing him with a knife andmaking a death threat that was credible in context. However, since the injuries to the clubmanager were clearly accidental, we exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to vacatethe corresponding conviction.
The court properly denied defendant's request for a justification charge, since therewas no reasonable view of the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to defendant,to support either the objective or subjective aspects (see People v Goetz, 68NY2d 96 [1986]) of that defense (see People v Watts, 57 NY2d 299, 301-302[1982]). There was no reasonable view that defendant believed, or had reason to believe,that the victims, along with their fellow club employees, were using anything more thanordinary physical force.
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur—Tom, J.P., Sweeny,Renwick and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.