The People v. Richard D DiGuglielmo
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
================================================================= This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. ----------------------------------------------------------------No. 125 The People &c., Respondent, v. Richard D. DiGuglielmo, Appellant. Andrew H. Schapiro, for appellant. Raffaelina Gianfrancesco, for respondent. MEMORANDUM: The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Assuming that defendant made a specific request for the material alleged to be exculpatory, we find no reasonable possibility that any failure to disclose it contributed to the verdict (see People v Vilardi, 76 NY2d 67, 77 [1990]). - 1 - Moreover, - 2 - No. 125 we reject defendant's claim that the evidence supporting his conviction of depraved indifference murder is legally insufficient because of our decision in People v Feingold (7 NY3d 288 [2006]). The standard enunciated in Feingold simply does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review (see Policano v Herbert, 7 NY3d 588, 603-604 [2006]), and defendant's claim that such a result violates the federal Due Process Clause is without merit (Wainwright v Stone, 414 US 21, 23-24 [1973]). * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Order affirmed, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur. Decided June 23, 2011 - 2 -
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.
