People v. Harris
Court of Appeals of the State of New York
740 N.E.2d 227 (2000)
- Written by Eric Cervone, LLM
Facts
Lydell Harris (defendant) was in a relationship with Monique Lloyd. Lloyd had previously been unfaithful to Harris with Harris’s long-time friend, Larry Amorose, and once left Harris for Amorose. One day, Amorose began taunting Harris by expressing in crude terms that he could have sex with Lloyd at any time and that she would leave Harris for him again. Harris testified that he completely lost control over his actions in response to Amorose’s taunts. He began hitting Amorose and stated that he just “couldn’t stop” attacking Amorose. Harris ended up killing Amorose. Harris testified that he then started crying and vomiting. With the help of Lloyd, Harris decapitated and dismembered Amorose’s body, put the parts in garbage bags, and discarded the bags in the ocean. Harris confessed to police, stating that during the attack he felt like he was watching a movie and did not have any control. At trial, Harris’s psychiatric expert testified that Harris satisfied the legal definition of extreme emotional disturbance. A jury convicted Harris of second-degree murder. Harris appealed, arguing that the court erred by not submitting Harris’s defense of extreme emotional disturbance to the jury. The Court of Appeals of the State of New York heard the appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Levine, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.