## Facts

- The defendant and his girlfriend possessed a substantial quantity of cocaine and planned to use it during a single night.
- The girlfriend was an admitted drug user but had limited familiarity with injecting cocaine; the defendant knew of her limited experience with intravenous use.
- The defendant administered two intravenous cocaine injections to the girlfriend.
- Afterward, the girlfriend injected herself several more times, including the injection immediately preceding her death.
- A prosecution medical expert testified that each injection, including the two administered by the defendant, was a contributing cause of death.
- The defendant was convicted of criminally negligent homicide; the intermediate appellate court affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to prove causation for criminally negligent homicide where the victim later self-injected and the defendant’s injections were not the last act in time.
2. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to prove criminal negligence, including that the defendant failed to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk and that the failure constituted a gross deviation from reasonable care.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction.
- The evidence supported causation because expert testimony permitted the jury to find the defendant’s injections were contributing causes of death.
- The evidence supported criminal negligence because injecting cocaine into a person with limited injection experience, in circumstances posing a substantial risk of fatal overdose, permitted a finding of a gross deviation from reasonable care.

## Legal Principles

- For homicide liability, a defendant’s conduct need not be the final act in time if it is a contributing cause of death and part of the causal sequence producing the fatal result.
- The victim’s later voluntary conduct does not necessarily break causation where the defendant’s conduct remains a causally significant factor in producing death.
- Criminally negligent homicide may be supported where the defendant fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death and that failure amounts to a gross deviation from the care a reasonable person would exercise in the situation.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the defendant’s criminally negligent homicide conviction because the jury could rationally find that his two intravenous cocaine injections contributed to the victim’s overdose death and that administering injections to an inexperienced user amid high-risk drug use constituted criminal negligence.


People v. Galle, 77 N.Y.2d 953 (N.Y. 1991)