Einaugler v. Supreme Court of New York

I respectfully dissent because I think that a lay jury could not, consistent with the Constitution, find that the State proved the elements of the crimes charged, in the absence of competent medical opinion testimony. Moreover, I do not believe that sufficient evidence was adduced at trial to prove that Einaugler had the requisite knowledge of the risk to his patient to sustain a conviction under the statutes at issue.

The majority acknowledges that a constitutional violation would have occurred if Einaugler was convicted without proof required by New York law. But it can discern no…