From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Anyakora

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 17, 1997
238 A.D.2d 216 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

April 17, 1997


Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard Fried, J.), rendered July 12, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of violation of Public Health Law § 2805-b (2) (b), falsifying business records in the first degree (two counts) and tampering with physical evidence in the first degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 5 years probation, 1,200 hours of community service, and fines in the amount of $10,000, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court ( 162 Misc.2d 47) properly determined that Public Health Law § 2805-b (2) (b) is not unconstitutionally vague. The terms "emergency medical treatment", "emergency" and "treat" provide sufficient notice of what is prohibited and required, such terms having accepted meanings ( see, People v Cruz, 48 N.Y.2d 419, 428, appeal dismissed 446 U.S. 901; People v Pagnotta, 25 N.Y.2d 333, 337; Defiance Milk Prods. Co. v. Du Mond, 309 N.Y. 537, 540; see also, Education Law § 6521, 6527 Educ. [2]; Public Health Law § 3001).

The verdict convicting defendant of violation of Public Health Law § 2805-b (2) (b) was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Viewing defendant's conduct as a whole, we find that there was ample evidence that he refused to treat the complainant within the meaning of the section.

The court properly refused to charge the defense of justification pursuant to Penal Law § 35.05 (2) with respect to evidence of alleged threatening behavior by a person accompanying the complainant to the hospital. There was no reasonable view of the evidence demonstrating an imminent or unavoidable harm, and there was similarly no reasonable view of the evidence that defendant's decision not to treat the complainant was an emergency measure or a necessary choice over alternative, legal courses of action ( see, People v. Maher, 79 N.Y.2d 978, 981-982; People v. Craig, 78 N.Y.2d 616, 622-624).

Defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved and would not, in any event, warrant reversal.

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Anyakora

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 17, 1997
238 A.D.2d 216 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Anyakora

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. PETER ANYAKORA…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Apr 17, 1997

Citations

238 A.D.2d 216 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
656 N.Y.S.2d 253

Citing Cases

People v. McNeal

The trial court properly denied defendant's request for a justification charge. There was no reasonable view…