People State New York v. Randolph Jenkins

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kooper, J.), rendered April 22, 1980, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and new trial ordered. Defendant was indicted and charged with the murder of one Alfred Schuler. The evidence adduced at the trial by the prosecution showed that defendant stabbed the victim with a knife. Defendants testimony at the trial regarding the homicide was that the victim attacked him with the knife by hitting him with the back of the handle under his eye. A struggle ensued during which he was in a daze from the blow. Defendant tried to fend off the victims thrusts with the knife. At some point the two disengaged and defendant fled. On this appeal defendant argues, inter alia, that the trial courts failure to charge the jury as to the defense of justification was error. The trial court, ruling that justification would not be charged, stated "his [defendants] story is he didnt stab him at all. If he didnt stab him at all, he couldnt have stabbed him in self defense * * * [then] there is no charge of justification". Defendants position at the trial to the effect that he did not stab the victim does not bar submission of the justification defense (see People v Steele, 26 N.Y.2d 526; People v Burnell, 84 A.D.2d 566; People v Davis, 74 A.D.2d 607). Where, however, there is no evidence to support justification, the court may refuse to charge it (People v Collice, 41 N.Y.2d 906; People v Frazier, 86 A.D.2d 557). For the purposes of the charge, a defendant is entitled to a view of the trial testimony in a light most favorable to him (People v Steele, supra; People v Burnell, supra). There was sufficient evidence presented to the jury by defendants own testimony, as well as the testimony of some of the prosecutions witnesses, which partially corroborated defendants version of the incident, to raise the defense of justification (see People v Frazier, 86 A.D.2d 557, 558, supra [Sandler, J., dissenting]). According to defendants version of the incident the victim was the aggressor, hitting him with the handle of the knife. A struggle ensued in which defendant attempted to protect himself from Schuler. In People v Collice (supra, p 907) the justification defense was held not available because "[even] if defendant had actually believed that he had been threatened with the imminent use of deadly physical force, and there is no evidence that he had so believed, his reactions were not those of a reasonable man acting in self-defense". Contrariwise, in the instant case the jury, after considering and accepting portions of the defense and prosecution evidence, which it is permitted to do (People v Scarborough, 49 N.Y.2d 364, 372), reasonably could have concluded that Schuler, the aggressor, was killed during the struggle and not by an intentional act on the part of defendant. Sufficient motive for defendants contention that Schuler was the aggressor is found in the undisputed evidence that defendant formerly lived with Elease Fields, and that Schuler was her present boyfriend. Defendant testified that while he was attending a party at Fields apartment he and Fields were in her bedroom alone when Schuler came [93 A.D.2d 868 Page 869]