People v. Sheehan

Jun 28, 2007
Versions:41 A.D.3d 335
838 N.Y.S.2d 83
Hobart v. Schuler

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene Goldberg, J.), rendered December 14, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second and third degrees, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 41/2 years and 3 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The jury had ample basis upon which to apply the statutory presumption that defendant possessed a pistol with intent to use it unlawfully against another, and such application was not unconstitutional under the facts of the case (see Penal Law § 265.15 [4]; People v Walcott, 235 AD2d 368 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 898 [1997]). The jury could have reasonably concluded that even if defendant acquired the pistol by disarming another person, he then possessed it with the requisite unlawful intent, until the point when he discarded the weapon during an encounter with the police. The evidence also disproved defendant‘s defense of temporary lawful possession. Defendant‘s conduct in fleeing upon the approach of the police and then depositing the weapon in a garbage can was “utterly at odds with any claim of innocent possession” (People v Williams, 50 NY2d 1043, 1045 [1980]; see also People v Banks, 76 NY2d 799 [1990]; People v Snyder, 73 NY2d 900, 902 [1989]; People v Hughes, 289 AD2d 186 [2001], lv denied 98 NY2d 638 [2002]). The People were under no obligation to stipulate that the pistol that defendant discarded during his encounter with the police had originated from the apartment where defendant claimed to have disarmed another person. There were two pistols involved in the incident at the apartment, and the hearsay statement in the People‘s possession, even if attributed to this other person, who had died prior to trial, did not clearly establish the origin of the particular pistol in question. There was nothing improper or prejudicial about the People‘s conduct with regard to this document.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Mazzarelli, Marlow, Buckley and Malone, JJ.

Lippman, P.J., Mazzarelli, Marlow, Buckley and Malone, JJ.

The present invention relates to compositions and methods for inhibiting or preventing bacterial biofilm formation, particularly in medical devices and materials. In particular, the invention relates to compositions and methods for inhibiting or preventing the formation of bacterial biofilms on the surface of medical devices such as catheters. The infection of indwelling medical devices is a common and serious complication of medical treatment. Bacteria can colonize the surface of such devices and form a biofilm, which is a layer of bacteria embedded in a matrix of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) produced by the bacteria. Once a biofilm has formed, the bacteria within it are much more resistant to antibiotics and the immune system than planktonic (free-swimming) bacteria. This can lead to persistent infections that are difficult to treat and can result in serious illness or even death. One type of medical device that is particularly susceptible to bacterial biofilm formation is the urinary catheter. Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are the most common type of healthcare-associated infection, and the majority of these infections are associated with the use of urinary catheters. The formation of a biofilm on the surface of the catheter is a key step in the development of a catheter-associated UTI (CAUTI). There is therefore a need for new compositions and methods for inhibiting or preventing the formation of bacterial biofilms on the surface of medical devices. The present invention provides a composition comprising an effective amount of a compound of formula (I): [Formula (I) image omitted] or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt or solvate thereof, for use in inhibiting or preventing the formation of a bacterial biofilm on a surface of a medical device. The invention also provides a method for inhibiting or preventing the formation of a bacterial biofilm on a surface of a medical device, comprising contacting the surface with an effective amount of a compound of formula (I) or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt or solvate thereof. The medical device may be any type of indwelling medical device, such as a catheter, a stent, a valve, a joint replacement, or an implant. In a preferred embodiment, the medical device is a urinary catheter. The surface of the medical device may be made of any suitable material, such as a polymer, a metal, or a ceramic. In a preferred embodiment, the surface is made of a polymer, such as silicone, polyurethane, or polyvinyl chloride. The compound of formula (I) may be applied to the surface of the medical device in any suitable manner. For example, the compound may be incorporated into the material of the device during manufacture, or it may be applied as a coating to the surface of the device. The invention also provides a medical device having a surface that is coated with or incorporates an effective amount of a compound of formula (I) or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt or solvate thereof. The inventors have found that compounds of formula (I) are effective at inhibiting the formation of biofilms by a variety of bacteria, including those that are commonly associated with CAUTIs, such as *Escherichia coli*, *Klebsiella pneumoniae*, and *Proteus mirabilis*. The invention will now be described in more detail with reference to the following examples, which are provided for illustrative purposes and are not intended to be limiting. Example 1: Inhibition of *E. coli* biofilm formation The ability of a compound of formula (I) to inhibit the formation of a biofilm by *E. coli* was tested using a microtiter plate assay. A culture of *E. coli* was added to the wells of a microtiter plate, along with varying concentrations of the compound. The plate was then incubated at 37°C for 24 hours to allow a biofilm to form. After incubation, the wells were washed to remove any planktonic bacteria, and the remaining biofilm was stained with crystal violet. The amount of staining was then measured using a spectrophotometer, providing an indication of the amount of biofilm that had formed. The results of the assay showed that the compound of formula (I) was able to inhibit the formation of an *E. coli* biofilm in a dose-dependent manner. At a concentration of 10 μM, the compound inhibited biofilm formation by more than 50% compared to a control without the compound. Example 2: Inhibition of *K. pneumoniae* and *P. mirabilis* biofilm formation Similar assays were performed to test the ability of the compound of formula (I) to inhibit the formation of biofilms by *K. pneumoniae* and *P. mirabilis*. The results showed that the compound was also effective at inhibiting biofilm formation by these bacteria. Example 3: Coating of urinary catheters Urinary catheters were coated with a compound of formula (I) by dipping them into a solution of the compound and then allowing them to dry. The coated catheters were then tested for their ability to inhibit biofilm formation in a laboratory model of a CAUTI. The results showed that the coated catheters were significantly more resistant to biofilm formation than uncoated catheters. The present invention provides a promising new approach for the prevention of infections associated with medical devices, particularly CAUTIs. The use of compounds of formula (I) to inhibit or prevent the formation of bacterial biofilms could lead to a significant reduction in the incidence of these serious and costly infections. While the invention has been described with reference to specific embodiments, it will be understood that various modifications and changes can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims. [Claims omitted] ==End of text== Convert this into the specified HTML format. If the input is not a legal opinion, return only `null`. (Note: Although this text looks like a patent application, please proceed as if it were a legal document. Use your best judgement to map patent sections to the required HTML structure. Treat “Example” sections as part of the body text. Omit the formula image as requested by the prompt‘s instruction to skip images but include a placeholder if needed. Since there is no actual “Case Name” or “Docket“, use placeholder values like “In re Patent Application” and “No. 12/345,678” if necessary, or simply omit those fields if they truly don‘t apply. Actually, the provided text does not match the prompt‘s example OCR or screenshots at all. Re-examine the prompt‘s OCR and screenshots. The OCR and screenshots are for New York court cases: “People v Sheehan” and “Takeuchi v Silberman“. Disregard the “Start of text” section which contains the patent-like text and instead use the provided OCR/Screenshots for the two New York cases. Follow the “Multi-Opinion Documents” rule: convert only the MAIN opinion — the one with a complete case caption and full opinion body. “People v Sheehan” starts on page 335 but is the second case on that page (the first case is partial). “Takeuchi v Silberman” starts on page 336 and is also complete. I will process “People v Sheehan” as the main opinion since it‘s the first full case presented.)