People v. McLaurin
Docket 161 KA 22-02026
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- New York
- Court
- Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Criminal Appeal
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Citation
- 2026 NY Slip Op 02527
- Docket
- 161 KA 22-02026
Appeal from a judgment of conviction following a jury trial in Onondaga County Court.
Summary
The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed defendant Curtez McLaurin’s conviction following a jury trial for second-degree murder (felony murder), attempted first-degree robbery, and second-degree criminal possession of a weapon. The court rejected McLaurin’s request for a manslaughter-in-the-second-degree jury charge because that offense is not a lesser included offense of felony murder, and found no prejudice from the omission as McLaurin had been acquitted of intentional murder. The court also declined to review an unpreserved challenge to a supplemental jury instruction, found the verdicts were not against the weight of the evidence, and affirmed the sentence as not unduly harsh.
Issues Decided
- Whether the trial court erred in refusing to charge manslaughter in the second degree as a lesser included offense of felony murder (murder in the second degree under Penal Law § 125.25[3]).
- Whether the court’s supplemental jury instruction (Allen charge) was erroneous and preserved for appellate review.
- Whether the jury verdicts were against the weight of the evidence.
- Whether the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or excessive.
Court's Reasoning
The court explained that manslaughter in the second degree is a lesser included offense of intentional second-degree murder but is not a lesser included offense of felony murder, so refusal to charge it was not error with respect to the felony-murder count. The court noted no prejudice because the defendant was acquitted of the intentional-murder theory. The challenge to the supplemental instruction was unpreserved and not reviewed in the interest of justice. Reviewing the record, the court found the evidence supported the convictions and the sentence was not excessive.
Authorities Cited
- Penal Law § 125.25
- Penal Law § 125.15
- People v Langlois17 AD3d 772 (3d Dept 2005)
- People v McIntosh162 AD3d 1612 (4th Dept 2018), affd 33 NY3d 1064 (2019)
- People v Danielson9 NY3d 342 (2007)
Parties
- Appellant
- Curtez McLaurin
- Respondent
- The People of the State of New York
- Attorney
- Frank H. Hiscock Legal Aid Society (Casey S. Duffy, of counsel)
- Attorney
- Onondaga County District Attorney (Bradley W. Oastler, of counsel)
- Judge
- Matthew J. Doran
- Judge
- Ann Dillon Flynn
Key Dates
- Decision date
- 2026-04-24
- Judgment rendered
- 2022-10-21
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consider seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals
If timely, counsel for the defendant can file an application for leave to appeal to New York's Court of Appeals challenging preserved or constitutional issues.
- 2
Evaluate post-conviction remedies
Defense counsel should review the trial record for possible preserved errors or constitutional claims that might support a motion to vacate or other collateral relief.
- 3
Advise client on sentence and incarceration planning
If the defendant remains incarcerated, counsel should review sentencing credits, release eligibility, and any possible programs or motions that could affect custody status.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The appeals court affirmed the convictions and sentence; it found no reversible error in the trial court's rulings and that the evidence supported the guilty verdicts.
- Why wasn't manslaughter given as an option to the jury?
- The court concluded manslaughter in the second degree is not a lesser included offense of felony murder, so the trial court did not err in refusing that charge for the felony-murder theory.
- Can the defendant challenge the supplemental jury instruction now?
- That challenge was unpreserved at trial, and the appellate court declined to review it as a matter of discretion, so it was not considered on appeal.
- What happens next for the defendant?
- Because the conviction and sentence were affirmed, the defendant may seek further review by a higher court if permitted, such as leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
People v McLaurin - 2026 NY Slip Op 02527 People v McLaurin 2026 NY Slip Op 02527 April 24, 2026 Appellate Division, Fourth Department THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v CURTEZ MCLAURIN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department Decided on April 24, 2026 161 KA 22-02026 Present: Bannister, J.P., Montour, Greenwood, Nowak, And Hannah, JJ. FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (CASEY S. DUFFY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (BRADLEY W. OASTLER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Matthew J. Doran, J.), rendered October 21, 2022. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of murder in the second degree, attempted robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25 [3]), attempted robbery in the first degree (§§ 110.00, 160.15 [2]), and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (§ 265.03 [3]). We affirm. Defendant contends that County Court erred in refusing his request to charge manslaughter in the second degree as a lesser included offense of murder in the second degree. We reject that contention. While, as the People correctly concede, manslaughter in the second degree ( see Penal Law § 125.15) is a lesser included offense of murder in the second degree under Penal Law § 125.25 (1) (intentional murder) ( see People v McIntosh , 162 AD3d 1612, 1613 [4th Dept 2018], affd 33 NY3d 1064 [2019]), defendant was not prejudiced by the failure to charge the lesser offense because he was acquitted on the intentional murder count ( see People v Brown , 53 NY2d 979, 981 [1981]; People v Ashraf , 186 AD2d 1057, 1058 [4th Dept 1992], lv denied 80 NY2d 1025 [1992]). Rather, defendant was convicted of felony murder ( see § 125.25 [3]) and manslaughter in the second degree is not a lesser included offense of that crime ( see People v Langlois , 17 AD3d 772, 774 [3d Dept 2005]). Defendant's challenge to the court's second Allen charge is unpreserved for our review ( see generally People v Moore , 213 AD3d 1213, 1214 [4th Dept 2023], lv denied 39 NY3d 1142 [2023]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crimes as charged to the jury ( see People v Danielson , 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant's further contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence ( see generally People v Bleakley , 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Contrary to defendant's contention, his sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Finally, we have considered defendant's remaining contention and conclude that it does not warrant reversal or modification of the judgment. Entered: April 24, 2026 Ann Dillon Flynn