People v. Devonish, 843 N.E.2d 1120 (N.Y. 2005). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Devonish, 843 N.E.2d 1120 (N.Y. 2005). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
15 citation events (15 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: People v. Desjardins, 113 A.D.3d 787 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2014)
How cited ↗
Cited for
6 N.Y.3d at 728 Viewing evidence in light most favorable to defendant6 citing cases5 listed here
  • People v. Desjardins, 113 A.D.3d 787 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2014).published 2 cites
    Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant (see People v Devonish, 6 NY3d 727, 728 [2005]), the robbery victims’ testimony established that during each of these robberies, one or more of the perpetrators consciously…
  • People v. Rivera, 72 A.D.3d 576 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2010).published
    Drawing all evidentiary inferences in the proponent’s favor, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree should have been charged (People v Devonish, 6 NY3d 727, 728 [2005]; People v Henderson, 41 NY2d 233 , 236 [1976]), and the c…
  • People v. Ryan, 55 A.D.3d 960 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2008).published
    Under the circumstances here and particularly in light of the People’s charge-down requests, defendant was also entitled to the lesser included instruction that he requested, and we are constrained to reverse and remit for a new trial on t…
  • People v. Hernandez, 42 A.D.3d 657 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2007).published
    In determining whether a defendant has established entitlement to a lesser included charge under the second prong of the test, we must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant (see People v Devonish, 6 NY3d 727, 728 […
  • People v. Kim, 83 A.D.3d 866 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2011).published
    Viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant, there is a reasonable view of the evidence which would support a finding that the defendant committed the lesser offense of attempted criminal trespass in the second degree but did not c…
At page 1120 cited at this page1 citing case
  • Finigan v. Marshall, 574 F.3d 57 (2d Cir. 2009).published
    People v. Devonish, 6 N.Y.3d 727 , 810 N.Y.S.2d 380 , 843 N.E.2d 1120, 1120 (2005).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
James Devonish, Appellant
New York Court of Appeals.
Dec 15, 2005.
Published opinion
843 N.E.2d 1120
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Legal Aid Society, New York City (Jeffrey I. Richman of counsel), for appellant., Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York City (Sandra E. Cavazos of counsel), for respondent.
Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith Concur in Memorandum.
Cited by 13 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and a new trial ordered.

Defendant was convicted of burglary in the second degree after he was found inside a locked church building with a bag containing the kinds of tools commonly used by burglars. A witness for the People, a general contractor for the church, testified that he stored his tools in the church basement and that one of the tools found in defendant’s possession was his for “sure,” and the others might have been. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to defendant (see People v Discala, 45 NY2d 38, 42 [1978]), the jury was entitled to infer that defendant did not bring the tools with him to the church, and thus that the evidence failed to show that he had criminal intent at the time of entry (see People v Scarborough, 49 NY2d 364, 373 [1980]). It was error to refuse defendant’s request that the jury be charged with the lesser included offense of criminal trespass in the second degree (CPL 300.50).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur in memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, etc.