People v. LoganPeople v. Logan
Aрpeal from a judgment of the County Court of Clinton County (Ryan, J.), rendered August 26, 1998, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of attempted murder in the first degree, assault in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and promoting prison contraband in the first degree.
Defendant, an inmate, was charged in a nine-count indictment with crimes arising out of an assault upon Luke Fеssette, a correction officer, on September 17, 1997. Following a jury trial, he was convicted of attempted murder in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, promoting prison contraband in the first degree and two counts of assault in the second degree, one for the attack on Fessette and one for biting another correction officer.
Here, defendant neither properly asserted his request to testify nor timely moved for dismissal of the indictment. With the burden upon him to establish that the District Attorney had actual receipt of his request to testify (see People v Brown,
Next addressing defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence and his assertion that the verdict convicting him of attempted murder in the first degree and one of the two counts of assault in the second degree was against the weight of the credible evidence, we find the verdict legally sufficient to establish all elements of these crimes (see People v Contes,
Fessette testified that defendant refused to return to his cell and then struck him in the face, forсed him downward into a forward bending position and stabbed him repeatedly in both the back and the head with а shank. Fessette eventually summoned assistance. The first to respond was Correction Officer Larry Collins. Upon Collins’s order, defendant released Fessette, but would not drop the weapon; he told Collins to
At trial, defendant testified on his own behalf. His descriptiоn of the encounter differed substantially from the testimony provided by the People. He contended that he and Fessette had a heated argument about the grievances that defendant filed against him,
In our view, the testimony was more than sufficient to enablе a rational jury to conclude that defendant intentionally engaged in conduct that would tend to cаuse the death of a state correctional institution employee and that he knew or had reason to know that the intended victim was such an employee (see Penal Law §§ 110.00, 125.27 [1] [a] [ii]; People v King,
Crew III, J.P., Spain, Lahtinen аnd Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Notes
. Notably, testimonial evidence revealed that no grievances had been filed.
. It does reveal, as testified to by the witnesses for the People, that after McCormack was bitten, he hit defendant in response.