Opinion ID: 147061
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Failure to move for dismissal on the ground of insufficient evidence of specific intent to kill

Text: At the close of the prosecution's case, defense counsel move[d] for a trial order of dismissal of the single count of the indictment because the People failed to establish every element of the crime charged[,] and this case particularly in ... its circumstantial nature is insufficient to go forward for a jury resolution. Trial Tr. vol. IV, 3009-10, Oct. 18, 2000. Following the close of evidence, counsel move[d] to dismiss the indictment ... on the basis that the People have failed to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt and to the legal standard required for the case to go to the jury. Id. at 3107, Oct. 23, 2000. Under New York law, [a] person is guilty of murder in the second degree when ... [w]ith intent to cause the death of another person, he causes the death of such person.... N.Y. Penal Law § 125.25[1]. A trial court may issue a trial order of dismissal as to any count of an indictment on the ground that the trial evidence is not legally sufficient to establish the offense charged. N.Y.Crim. Pro. Law § 290.10[1]. Under New York law, a motion to dismiss for insufficient evidence must be specifically directed at the alleged error. People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 629 N.Y.S.2d 173, 652 N.E.2d 919, 921 (1995) (internal quotation marks omitted). Bierenbaum claims that his counsel was ineffective because his motions did not specify that he was challenging the element of intent to kill, and that therefore he could not seek review of this claim on direct appeal. Although on this record the Appellate Division could have found a claim of lack of intent to kill unpreserved, it addressed the legal sufficiency of both elements of second degree murder: The People proved beyond a reasonable doubt that this defendant had the opportunity, the motive, and the intent to kill his victim, and that it was he who did so. Bierenbaum, 748 N.Y.S.2d at 579. Given that the Appellate Division reviewed the claim that the evidence was legally insufficient to prove that Bierenbaum intended to cause Katz's death, he cannot claim that counsel was ineffective in failing to preserve the issue for appeal.