Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Rodriguez

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 24, 2011Published

1Dissent

Ciparick, J. (dissenting).

Because I believe that Supreme Court erred in refusing to give a choice-of-evils justification instruction to the jury (Penal Law § 35.05 [2]), as requested by defendant, I respectfully dissent and would affirm the order of the Appellate Division.

It is well-settled that “a defendant is entitled to an instruction as to any recognized defense for which there exists evidence sufficient for a reasonable jury to find in his favor” (Mathews v United States, 485 US 58, 63 [1988]). In determining whether the evidence is sufficient, “[a] court must view the evidence adduced…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Mathews v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. People v. TuckerNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. People v. WattsNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  4. People v. ButtsNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
  5. People v. ZonaNew York Court of Appeals · 2010

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API