People v Montanez (Francisco)

Annotate this Case
[*1] People v Montanez (Francisco) 2007 NY Slip Op 51806(U) [17 Misc 3d 126(A)] Decided on September 21, 2007 Appellate Term, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on September 21, 2007
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : RUDOLPH, P.J, McCABE and MOLIA, JJ
2005-535 S CR.

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Francisco Montanez, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, First District (Howard M. Bergson, J.), rendered March 25, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of menacing in the second degree.


Judgment of conviction affirmed.

The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the lower court erred in charging justification pursuant to section 35.05 (2) of the Penal Law rather than section 35.15 (1) thereof.

Penal Law section 35.15 (1) involves justification for the use of physical force. The evidence adduced at trial established that defendant, at most, exhibited a gun but never pointed it directly at the individuals he believed posed a threat to him. He pointed the gun toward the ground or toward the bottom of the bumper of their automobile. There was no evidence indicating that defendant ever cocked the gun. Under the circumstances, we conclude that defendant displayed the weapon but never used physical force (cf. People v Magliato, 68 NY2d 24, 30 [1986]). Consequently, Penal Law section 35.15 (1) was not applicable. Section 35.05 (2) was the proper charge since it involves the use of conduct which would otherwise be an offense in order to prevent a public or private injury. Inasmuch as the court did not err and gave the proper charge, the judgment convicting defendant of menacing in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.14 [1]) must be affirmed.

Rudolph, P.J., McCabe and Molia, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: September 21, 2007

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.