Skip to main content

Carjacking suspect enters not-guilty plea in first County Court appearance

By Howard B. Owens
murrell_constantinemug2018.jpg
 Constantine Murrell

Carjacking suspect Constantine Murrell, 35, a parolee from Rochester, entered a not-guilty plea at his arraignment today in Genesee County Court on counts of second-degree robbery and second-degree assault.

Murrell is accused of forcibly taking a car from a woman at the Kwik Fill, 99 Jackson St., Batavia, on Sept. 25.

He is also charged with reckless driving and unlawful fleeing a police officer.

After allegedly stealing the sedan, Murrell is accused leading police on a chase through city streets that reached 65 mph.

The chase came to an end when the stolen vehicle struck another car at Redfield Parkway and Richmond Avenue, which caused it to careen into a tree and the recently installed sign at the entrance of VA Medical Center.

The car then caught on fire.

The woman who had been driving the car was not physically injured.

Murrell was released from prison in April after serving an eight-year sentence for a 2010 kidnapping conviction in Rochester. He also has a previous drug conviction.

He reportedly told police after his arrest that he didn't know how he wound up in Batavia on Sept. 25. He said he had gotten into a truck with a man he didn't know in Rochester to do the drug K-2 and that the man left him in Batavia. He told police he panicked and just wanted to get back to Rochester.

“(I) couldn’t figure out how I would do it," Murrell is quoted in a court document as telling police. "I was at the gas station and saw an old lady in a white car at the gas pumps. I figured that it would be pretty easy to scare her and take her car.”

Judge Charles Zambito reaffirmed Murrell's bail status. He is being held without the possibility of bail. He will reappear in County Court on Jan. 23 for a hearing on pretrial motions.

There was no discussion of any potential plea offer.

The Batavian's news partner, 13WHAM contributed to this story.

Eric Dunn

So he said "I was at the gas station and saw an old lady in a white car at the gas pumps. I figured that it would be pretty easy to scare her and take her car", and believes he is not guilty.

Nov 22, 2018, 9:50am Permalink
Ed Hartgrove

Hi, Eric! Yeah, I think you're equating what someone is allowed to do with what someone believes (or, knows for a fact).

Although there's no way to know the actual percentage, I would imagine that 90% of "guilty" people who enter not-guilty pleas KNOW or BELIEVE that they're actually guilty of the charge(s) lodged against them. The other 10% probably believe they're not guilty (due to their misunderstanding of a law).

They are probably trying to get some kind of a favorable plea deal, or, have their attorneys find some "loophole".
Especially if you consider that a lot of them are represented by taxpayer-funded attorneys. If they immediately plead guilty, they're immediately convicted. What do they have to lose by prolonging the proceedings? It's not coming out of their pockets, and, they might get lucky and find a way out.

Nov 23, 2018, 12:08am Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Defendants who plead not guilty at their initial arraignment aren't trying to "prolong the proceedings."

They have a constitutional right to due process, which means the people must prove the People's case. There must be sufficient evidence to lead to a likely conviction at trial to even take the case to trial. They have a right for a Grand Jury to hear that evidence (they can also waive that right, which often happens in a plea deal). They have a right to make certain motions to test the validity and legality of the evidence.

I can't think of a time where I've ever seen a defendant facing felony charges plead guilty at an initial arraignment. To do so wouldn't be just against the defense attorney's advice, any attorney regardless of who is paying, it would be dumb.

Yes, the process can sometimes lead to more favorable plea deals but this too benefits society by reducing jail time at taxpayer expense.

It should be noted that if anybody has a motivation for a quick guilty plea it would be a publicly-paid-for attorney -- quickly dispose of the obviously guilty so they can concentrate their time on the cases that might lead to a favorable verdict for the defendant. If a government-appointed attorney, the more cases they can take on (quicker pleas mean faster client turnover), the better. Fortunately, the vast majority of defense attorneys don't operate this way and take seriously their ethical obligation to aggressively represent the best interests of their clients.

This system, aggressive and conscientious defense, and zealous prosecution is how all interests of society are protected. Checks and balances. Something you won't find in the criminal justice systems, if you can call it that, of authoritarian states.

Nov 23, 2018, 3:04pm Permalink
John Roach

Another reason people will pled not guilty is that they get to stay in County Jail longer. It's easier to do time in a County Jail than a State Prison. This guy is on parole. If found guilty, he goes back to State prison and probably will be sent to a facility on the other end of the State, making it harder to get visits from family. For now, and for as long as he can drag it out, he stays here, near Rochester.

Nov 24, 2018, 6:21am Permalink

Authentically Local