People v. Williams
Docket 2019-11755
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 02424
- Docket
- 2019-11755
Appeal from a criminal judgment convicting the defendant of first-degree manslaughter and sentencing him to 15 years' imprisonment plus 5 years postrelease supervision
Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed defendant Troy Williams's conviction for first-degree manslaughter after a jury trial but reduced his sentence in the interest of justice. The court found the guilty verdict was not against the weight of the evidence, denied claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, and held a claim that the People withheld Brady material must be raised in a CPL 440.10 motion because the supporting facts are dehors the record. Exercising its discretion, the court reduced the prison term from 15 years to 8 years (postrelease supervision unchanged) and otherwise affirmed the judgment.
Issues Decided
- Whether the jury's guilty verdict was against the weight of the evidence
- Whether the defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel
- Whether the People suppressed Brady material
- Whether the sentence imposed was excessive
Court's Reasoning
The court conducted an independent review of the evidence and, giving deference to the jury's opportunity to observe witnesses, concluded the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. The record as a whole showed counsel's performance met federal and state standards for effectiveness. The alleged suppression of Brady material involved facts outside the trial record and therefore must be raised in a CPL 440.10 motion rather than on direct appeal. Finally, the court exercised its sentencing discretion and found the original 15-year term excessive, reducing it to 8 years in the interest of justice.
Authorities Cited
- CPL 470.15(5)
- People v Danielson9 NY3d 342
- Strickland v. Washington466 U.S. 668
- Brady v. Maryland373 U.S. 83
- People v Suitte90 AD2d 80
Parties
- Appellant
- Troy Williams
- Respondent
- The People of the State of New York
- Judge
- Vincent M. Del Giudice
- Judge
- Francesca E. Connolly
Key Dates
- Decision date
- 2026-04-22
- Original sentencing date / judgment rendered
- 2019-09-27
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consider filing a CPL 440.10 motion
If the defendant believes Brady material was withheld, counsel should prepare a CPL 440.10 motion presenting the extrinsic facts and supporting evidence outside the trial record.
- 2
Evaluate prospects for further appellate review
If the defendant seeks additional review, counsel should consider applying for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals and assess deadlines and issues worth raising.
- 3
Prepare for sentencing logistics
Counsel should confirm amended sentencing paperwork and coordinate with corrections authorities regarding the reduced 8-year term and postrelease supervision arrangements.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The court affirmed the conviction for first-degree manslaughter but reduced the prison sentence from 15 years to 8 years, with 5 years of postrelease supervision remaining.
- Does this mean the defendant is free now?
- No. The conviction stands and the defendant remains subject to the reduced 8-year sentence and 5 years of postrelease supervision.
- What happened to the claim that the prosecutor hid evidence?
- The court said that claim relies on facts outside the trial record and must be pursued in a CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment, not on direct appeal.
- Can this decision be appealed further?
- Yes. The defendant may seek further review, for example by applying for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, subject to appellate rules and deadlines.
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 Williams - 2026 NY Slip Op 02424 People v Williams 2026 NY Slip Op 02424 April 22, 2026 Appellate Division, Second Department The People of the State of New York, respondent, v Troy Williams, appellant. Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department Decided on April 22, 2026 2019-11755, (Ind. No. 6892/17) Francesca E. Connolly, J.P. Valerie Brathwaite Nelson Barry E. Warhit James P. McCormack, JJ. Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (White & Case LLP [Courtney Andrews, Abigail Warner Mahoney, pro hac vice, Olivia Hussey, and Jacob Showers], of counsel), for appellant. Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Michael Bierce of counsel), for respondent. DECISION & ORDER Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vincent M. Del Giudice, J.), rendered September 27, 2019, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him to a determinate term of imprisonment of 15 years, to be followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision. ORDERED that the judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentence imposed from a determinate term of imprisonment of 15 years, to be followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision, to a determinate term of imprisonment of 8 years, to be followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed. The defendant was convicted, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree in connection with a shooting that occurred in Brooklyn on August 27, 2017. In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence ( see CPL 470.15[5]; People v Danielson , 9 NY3d 342), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor ( see People v Mateo , 2 NY3d 383, 410; People v Bleakley , 69 NY2d 490, 495). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v Romero , 7 NY3d 633). The defendant's contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel is without merit. The record as a whole demonstrates that the defendant received the effective assistance of counsel under both the federal and state constitutional standards ( see Strickland v Washington , 466 US 668, 688; People v Benevento , 91 NY2d 708, 712). The defendant's contention that the People withheld certain Brady material ( see Brady v Maryland , 373 US 83) is not properly raised on direct appeal and should be raised in a motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate the judgment, because the facts supporting the defendant's contention are dehors the record ( see People v Abad , 208 AD3d 892, 894; People v Petion , 186 AD3d 1410, 1411). The sentence imposed was excessive to the extent indicated herein ( see People v Suitte , 90 AD2d 80). The defendant's remaining contention is without merit. CONNOLLY, J.P., BRATHWAITE NELSON, WARHIT and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur. ENTER: Darrell M. Joseph