Intentional
Homicide In
New York
Fall 2013
Intentional Homicide in NY
 Murder in the Second Degree
 Murder in the First Degree
 Murder of a Police Officer
 Murder using torture
 Murder of a Judge
 Manslaughter in the First Degree
 Extreme Emotional Disturbance
Murder in the Second Degree
THE BASE CRIME
 In order for you to consider Murder in the
First Degree or Manslaughter in the First
Degree, you must FIRST consider Murder
in the Second Degree
 WHY? All the elements of Murder in the
Second Degree are also contained in the
other offenses.
Intentional Homicide in NY
METHOD
① Read the Statute
② Break into Elements
③ Apply facts to elements
Murder in the Second Degree
(Penal Law § 125.25 [1])
A person is guilty of murder in the
second degree when with intent to
cause the death of another person,
he causes the death of such person
or of a third person
Murder in the Second Degree
(Penal Law § 125.25 [1])
A person is guilty of murder in the
second degree when:
 with intent to cause the death of
another person,
 he causes the death of such
person or of a third person
“or of a third person”
TRANSFERRED INTENT
“or of a third person” = transferred intent
If a person intends to do something to
one person (i.e., the intended victim) but
unintentionally does something to another
(i.e., the victim), that person is still guilty
of that crime as if s/he intended to do that
Murder in the Second Degree
(Penal Law § 125.25 [1])
ELEMENTS (SET UP)
A person is guilty of murder in the
second degree when with intent to
cause the death of another person, he
causes the death of such person or of a
①
HARM
third person.
LOOK FOR: ② CAUSATION
③ INTENT
Murder in the Second Degree
(Penal Law § 125.25 [1])
ELEMENTS (SET UP)
① HARM. A specific harm
② CAUSATION. Causing a specific harm
to a specific person
③ INTENT. Intending to do a specific
harm to that person (or another)
Murder in the Second Degree
(Penal Law § 125.25 [1])
ELEMENTS (SET UP)
① HARM. What is the specific harm for
murder?
Death of another
Murder in the Second Degree
(Penal Law § 125.25 [1])
ELEMENTS (SET UP)
② CAUSATION. Causing a specific
harm to a specific person
 CAUSATION. Causing death
to a specific person
Murder in the Second Degree
(Penal Law § 125.25 [1])
ELEMENTS (SET UP)
③ INTENT. Intending to do a specific
harm to that person (or another)
 INTENT. Intending to
cause the death of that
person (or another)
Murder in the Second Degree
(Penal Law § 125.25 [1])
ELEMENTS (SET UP)
① HARM. Death
② CAUSATION. Causes the death to
a specific person
③ INTENT. Intended to cause death
of that person (or another)
Murder in the Second Degree
(Penal Law § 125.25 [1])
ELEMENTS
① Defendant causes the death of a
person (or of a third person) [Harm
and causation]
② S/He intended to cause the death
of another person [Intent]
FORMULAS
Murder in the Second Degree
Causation
+
Intent
Murder in the First Degree
Causation
+
Intent
+
Aggravating Factors
Defendant is 18+ YO
Manslaughter in the First Degree
Causation
+
Intent
+
Extreme Emotional
Disturbance
RULE
IF THE ELEMENTS TO MURDER IN THE
SECOND DEGREE ARE NOT THERE, THEN
THERE CAN BE
NO MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
NO MANSLAUGHTER IN THE FIRST
DEGREE
Murder in the First Degree
(Penal Law § 125.27 [1])
WHERE INTENDED VICTIM WAS A POLICE
OFFICER
A person is guilty of murder in the first degree
when
1. With intent to cause the death of another
person, he causes the death of such person
or of a third person; and
(a) (i) the intended victim was a police
officer … who was at the time of the killing
engaged in the course of performing his
official duties, and the defendant knew or
Murder in the First Degree
(Penal Law § 125.27 [1])
WHERE INTENDED VICTIM WAS A POLICE
OFFICER
① Defendant caused death of another
② Defendant intended to cause death of
another
③ The intended victim was a police officer
④ At the time of killing, police officer was
engaged in the course of performing
official duties
⑤ Defendant knew or reasonably should
Murder in the First Degree
(Penal Law § 125.27 [1])
WHERE DEFENDANT TORTURED VICTIM
A person is guilty of murder in the first degree
when
1. With intent to cause the death of another
person, he causes the death of such person
or of a third person; and
(a) (x) the defendant acted in an especially
cruel and wanton manner pursuant to a
course of conduct intended to inflict and
inflicting torture upon the victim prior to the
Murder in the First Degree
(Penal Law § 125.27 [1])
WHERE DEFENDANT TORTURED VICTIM
… As used in this subparagraph,
“torture” means the intentional and depraved
infliction of extreme physical pain;
“depraved” means the defendant relished the
infliction of extreme physical pain upon the
victim evidencing debasement or perversion
or that the defendant evidenced a sense of
pleasure in the infliction of extreme physical
pain
Murder in the First Degree
(Penal Law § 125.27 [1])
WHERE DEFENDANT TORTURED VICTIM
① Defendant caused the death of another
② Defendant intended to cause the death
of another
③ Prior to the victim’s death, the defendant
engaged in a course of conduct and
inflicted torture upon the victim
④ In doing so, the defendant acted in an
Murder in the First Degree
(Penal Law § 125.27 [1])
WHERE THE INTENDED VICTIM IS A JUDGE
A person is guilty of murder in the first degree
when
1. With intent to cause the death of another
person, he causes the death of such person
or of a third person; and
(a) (xii) the intended victim was a judge as
defined in and the defendant killed such
victim because such victim was, at the time
of the killing, a judge
Murder in the First Degree
(Penal Law § 125.27 [1])
WHERE VICTIM WAS A JUDGE
① Defendant caused the death of another
② Defendant intended to cause the death
of another
③ The intended victim was a judge
④ The defendant killed the judge
because such victim was, at the time
of the killing, a judge
Murder in the First Degree
(Penal Law § 125.27 [1])
PLUS
+
... The defendant was, at the time
of the killing, over 18 years old
Manslaughter in the First Degree
(Penal Law § 125.20 [1])
EXTREME EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
A person is guilty of manslaughter in the first
degree when
2. With intent to cause the death of another
person, he causes the death of such
person or of a third person under
circumstances which do not constitute
murder because he acts under the
influence of extreme emotional disturbance
Manslaughter in the First Degree
(Penal Law § 125.20 [1])
ELEMENTS
① Defendant caused the death of another
② Defendant intended to cause the death of another
③ The defendant had an extreme emotional
disturbance.
④ The defendant acted under the influence of that
extreme emotional disturbance.
⑤ The explanation or excuse for such extreme
emotional disturbance that was reasonable. The
reasonableness of that explanation or excuse must
be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the
Exercise

Working in a group, you will apply the law
to the fact patterns in the book and make
a presentation to the class.

Make sure you follow the steps!
Preparation
1) Should the defendant be charged with
 Murder in the 1st degree?
 Murder in the 2nd degree? and/or
 Manslaughter in the first degree?
2) Are all the elements met?
Preparation Steps
① Fact Pattern
② Analyze Murder in the 2nd
Degree
③ Further Analyze
a) Murder 1st Degree and/or
b) Manslaughter 1st Degree
Step 1: Read the Fact Pattern
 Look to see if there was a death
 Look to see who is who
 Who is the victim (judge or police
officer)?
 Who was the intended victim?
 Who is the actor and age?
 Who is an accomplice and age?
 Look to see how the person died
Step 2: Murder in the Second?
[BASE]
1)
Did someone die?
2)
Did the defendant cause that death?
3)
Did the defendant intend to cause that
death?
Step 3: Murder 1st / Manslaughter
1st?
1) Was the victim a judge?
2) Was the intended victim a police
officer?
3) Was the victim tortured?
4) Was the defendant over 18 years
old?
MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE?
POLICE OFFICER
1) Was the intended victim a police
officer?
2) Was the officer at the time engaged
in official duties?
3) Did the defendant know or
reasonably should have known that
the intended victim was an officer?
WAS THE OFFICER AT THE TIME
ENGAGED IN OFFICIAL DUTIES?
1) Was the officer on duty? OR
2) What was the officer doing?
Did the defendant know or reasonably
should have known that the intended
victim was an officer?
1) In uniform?
2) Shield out?
3) Stated s/he was a police officer?
4) Past experience with this police
officer
EXAMPLE
Charlie is running an illegal gambling
establishment. Debbie, a police officer, is
assigned to investigate. She enters the
establishment and announces that she is
a police officer and that everyone is under
arrest. Charlie sees Debbie and yells that
no cop is going to shut him down. He pulls
ANALYSIS
DOES IT MEET THE ELEMENTS FOR
MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE?
 Did someone die? YES (Debbie died)
 Did the defendant cause that death? YES
(Charlie shot her)
 Did the defendant intend to cause that death?
YES
 Therefore, the elements are satisfied
EXAMPLE, CONTINUED
ANALYSIS
DOES IT ALSO MEET THE ELEMENTS FOR
MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE?
— POLICE OFFICER —
 Was the intended victim a police officer? YES
 Was the officer at the time engaged in official
duties? YES (she was arresting Charlie)
 Did the defendant know or reasonably should
have known that the intended victim was an
officer? YES (she announced that she was a
police officer)
EXAMPLE, CONTINUED
PRESENTATION
Charlie can be found guilty of murder in the first
and second degree.
First, Charlie can be found guilty of murder in the
second degree:
a) The first element, causing the death of
another, is satisfied in that Charlie caused the
death of Debbie since he shot her; and
b) The second element, the defendant intended
to cause the death of another, is satisfied in
that Charlie intended to cause the death of
Next, Charlie can be found guilty of murder in the
first degree.
a) The first element, the defendant intended to
cause the death of another, is satisfied in
that Charlie caused the death of Debbie
when he shot her;
b) The second element, the defendant
intended to cause the death of another, is
satisfied in that Charlie intended to cause
the death of Debbie because he aimed the
gun at her;
c) The third element, that the intended victim
was a police officer, is satisfied in that
d) The fourth element, that the police officer was
engaged in performing his/her official duties, is
satisfied in that Debbie, who was arresting
Charlie for running an illegal gambling
establishment, was engaged in the course of
performing her official duties;
e) The fifth element, that the defendant knew (or
reasonably should have known) that the
intended victim was in fact a police officer, is
satisfied in that Charlie knew that Debbie was a
police officer because she announced that she
was a police officer; and....
f) Charlie is over the age of 18.
Your Turn
① Break into groups
② Choose which fact patterns (group)
③ Prepare
④ Presentation as a paralegal
⑤ You get graded as a paralegal
(usefulness)