People v. Hill
Opinion of the Court
—Appeal by the defen
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, there is no reasonable view of the evidence which would support a finding that he was not aware of the risk of death in holding a loaded shotgun with his finger on the trigger in close proximity to the victim to warrant a charge of criminally-negligent homicide as a lesser-included offense of manslaughter in the second degree (see, People v Randolph, 81 NY2d 868, 869; People v Green, 56 NY2d 427, 434; People v Cameron, 244 AD2d 350; People v Ficaro, 233 AD2d 460, 461; People v Stephens, 198 AD2d 245, affd 84 NY2d 990; People v Williams, 192 AD2d 737; People v Jenkins, 176 AD2d 348).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Florio and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.