Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

PEOPLE v. DIGUGLIELMO, 17 N.Y.3d 771 (2011)

Court: Court of Appeals of New York Number: innyco20110623385 Visitors: 26
Filed: Jun. 23, 2011
Latest Update: Jun. 23, 2011
Summary: OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Assuming that defendant made a specific request for the material alleged to be exculpatory, we find no reasonable possibility that any failure to disclose it contributed to the verdict ( see People v Vilardi, 76 N.Y.2d 67 , 77 [1990]). Moreover, we reject defendant's claim that the evidence supporting his conviction of depraved indifference murder is legally insufficient because of our decision in Peop
More

OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Assuming that defendant made a specific request for the material alleged to be exculpatory, we find no reasonable possibility that any failure to disclose it contributed to the verdict (see People v Vilardi, 76 N.Y.2d 67, 77 [1990]). Moreover, we reject defendant's claim that the evidence supporting his conviction of depraved indifference murder is legally insufficient because of our decision in People v Feingold (7 N.Y.3d 288 [2006]). The standard enunciated in Feingold simply does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review (see Policano v Herbert, 7 N.Y.3d 588, 603-604 [2006]), and defendant's claim that such a result violates the Federal Due Process Clause is without merit (Wainwright v Stone, 414 U.S. 21, 23-24 [1973]).

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer