Maybe we have come along way and maybe we have not?

People v Williams, 2013 NY Slip Op 07636 (4th Dept. 2013)

The Court in Rochester reduced a depraved indifference reckless endangerment charge t0 a misdemeanor when it state that HIV is at best a chronic disease and not  the life threatening monster it was when many of us were growing up.  Not sure if this is evolution of devolution.

“We further conclude that the grand jury evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People (see Jennings, 69 NY2d at 114), also did not establish that defendant’s conduct presented a grave risk of death to the victim (see Penal Law § 120.25; Lynch, 95 NY2d at 247). The victim’s physician, an infectious disease expert, testified that the ability to treat HIV has increased dramatically over the past 15 years, with over 20 different antiviral medications available for treatment. The expert testified that although an HIV positive diagnosis may have been tantamount to a death sentence in the past, with treatment, the prognosis today is “outstanding,” particularly when a patient promptly learns that he or she is infected and seeks treatment. Indeed, the expert testified that patients with HIV who take their medication, eat well, do not smoke, and reduce their alcohol intake can live a “very healthy, normal lifestyle,” and he expected a similar prognosis for the victim. We thus conclude that, under the circumstances of this case, the People failed to establish that defendant’s reckless conduct posed a grave or “very substantial” risk of death to the victim (People v Roe, 74 NY2d 20, 24). ”

Just something to think about.

Related Articles

• Understanding CPLR 3212(a) timing rules for summary judgment motions
• The CPLR 3212(g) paradigm for summary judgment practice
• No-Fault regulation amendments and their practical implications
• New York No-Fault Insurance Law

Legal Update (February 2026): The medical understanding and legal treatment of HIV-related criminal charges discussed in this 2013 case may have evolved significantly over the past decade, with potential changes in prosecutorial standards, medical expert testimony requirements, and judicial approaches to assessing “grave risk of death” in similar cases. Practitioners handling HIV-related criminal matters should verify current medical consensus and legal precedents when evaluating charges under Penal Law § 120.25.