People v. Perry

N.Y.

Court: New York Court of Appeals

Citations: 61 N.Y.2d 849, 473 N.Y.S.2d 966, 462 N.E.2d 143, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4104

Decision Date: 2/21/1984

Jurisdiction: NY

Bluebook Citation: People v. Perry, 61 N.Y.2d 849, 473 N.Y.S.2d 966, 462 N.E.2d 143, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4104 (1984)

More Cases: N.Y. decisions from 1984

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Perry, Appellant.

Attorneys

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
John L. Pertieone, Acting Public Defender (Kenneth Ira Krigstein of counsel), for appellant.
Patrick H. Mathews, District Attorney (Joann Rose Parry of counsel), for respondent.

majority

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, and a new trial ordered. The trial court’s refusal to charge on intoxication denied defendant his right to have the jury properly consider the effect intoxication could have on the element of intent (Penal Law, § 15.25). A charge on intoxication should be given if there is sufficient evidence of intoxication in the record for a reasonable person to entertain a doubt as to the element of intent on that basis (People v Orr, 43 AD2d 836, affd 35 NY2d 829; see, also, People v Lee, 35 NY2d 826). On the present record, although defendant testified that he was aware of his actions, there is undisputed evidence of defendant’s intoxication at the time of the commission of the crime. Therefore, the trial court’s failure to charge on intoxication constitutes reversible error.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order reversed and a new trial ordered in a memorandum.

Chat with this case using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this case, check whether it is still good law, and see every case that cites it. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.