Nicole Addimando is no longer facing life in prison. Butshe will remain imprisoned.
The Poughkeepsie woman, convicted of murdering her live-in boyfriend and the father of her children, Christopher Grover, saw her sentence reduced to 7½ years in prison by thestate Supreme Court’s Appellate Division.
The appeals court issued a decision Wednesday, judging Addimando deserved to be sentenced under the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act, nearly three months after her hearing. The court, however, rejected appeals regarding Addimando's conviction itself.
Hearing: What was argued during Addimando's appeal of murder conviction, sentencing
Denial: Addimando 'had the opportunity to safely leave,' denied lenient sentencing
Guilty: Addimando verdict a rare outcome in Dutchess County history
Previously, Addimando had been denied such sentencing by Dutchess County Judge Edward McLoughlin, who presided over the three-week murder trial and sentencing hearing. Shewas sentenced in February 2020 to 19 years to life, which she is serving in Bedford Hills Correctional Facility.
Addimando was convicted of second-degree murder in April 2019. She never denied the September 2017 shooting, but claimed she did so after years of physical and emotional abuse. Prosecutors long argued that while she may have been a victim, there was no evidence directly proving Grover was the culprit of the abuse.
In its decision, which the court noted was the first time the appeals board dealt with the two-year-old law, the court said the act "was passed in recognition that less harsh sentences may be imposed in certain appropriate cases involving domestic violence survivors. We are persuaded that the instant case is such an appropriate case."
The appeals court largely rejected McLoughlin's interpretation of the law and his judgement of the evidence presented.
William Tendy, the Putnam County district attorney whose office prosecuted the case, objected to the reduced sentencing.
"It appears the court simply believed everything the defendant said at trial about the abuse she claims came from her victim, Chris Grover," Tendy said.
However, the court's decision is being cheered by domestic violence advocates. Through the legal process, Addimando amassed a fleet of vocal supporters, many of whom attended hearings, court dates and rallies clad in purple, a color in support of domestic violence survivors and awareness.
Branka Bryan, executive director of Grace Smith House, a private, nonprofit agency that serves domestic violence victims and their families in Dutchess County, was glad to hear the appellate court's decision.
"I think the justice system responded with compassion," Bryan said. "But we still have a lot of work to do to get to where we are not faced with such situations."
Attempts to reach Addimando's representation were unsuccessful Wednesday.
What the appeals court decided
The decision said, "the County Court found that while it was presumed the defendant may have been abused in her life, the choice she made that night and the manner in which the murder occurred outweighed what the court referred to as the defendant’s 'undetermined abusive history.'
"Upon our extensive review of the evidence, we reject the County Court’s methodology, approach, application, and analysis of the three factors, as set forth under" the survivor's act, the decision said.
In addition to 7½ years in prison, Addimando is sentenced to five years post-release supervision. She was also convicted of second degree criminal possession of a weapon; that sentence, which runs concurrently, was also reduced to 3½ years.
In his decision, McLoughlin noted Addimando “had the opportunity to safely leave her alleged abuser” before the shooting, and said “it is not clear whether the alleged abuse was carried out by Christopher Grover in part or in whole, and to what degree.”
Her choice to shoot Grover outweighs the alleged abuse she faced, McLoughlin said, notingin both versions of what happened the night Grover was shot — prosecutors claim she shot him in his sleep, the defense said she shot him after a struggle — she was holding the gun and had the power to leave the apartment.
The appeals court saidAddimando provedher claims of abuse "through her lengthy testimony, photographs, and other evidence that Grover repeatedly abused her physically and sexually.
"Basically, the (Dutchess) court premised its analysis on a presumption or notion that the defendant could have avoided further abuse at the hands of Grover. We will not engage in any such presupposition," the decision sThe evidence, which included a detailed history of repeated sexual, physical, and psychological abuse by Grover against the defendant, expert testimony regarding the impact of that abuse on the defendant, and the defendant’s testimony regarding the events prior to the subject shooting, established that the abuse was a significant contributing factor to the defendant’s criminal behavior."
The appeals court notedin deciding on the new sentence, it factored in both her background and also the manner in which Grover was murdered.
"The defendant is a 32-year-old mother of two young children, and has no known prior arrests or convictions. The defendant testified that she was repeatedly physically and sexually abused by Grover, as well as by other men in her past, and reportedly was sexually assaulted at the age of 5," the judges wrote in the decision."However, our examination under this factor does not end there. We also consider, among other things, the details of the crimes, including that the defendant shot Grover in the head as he was lying on the couch. Grover’s fatal injury was described as a hard contact wound in which the gun fired by the defendant was pressed against Grover’s skin, leaving a muzzle imprint."
Conviction appeal denied
The conviction appeal assertedAddimando’s original attorney, Kara Gerry of the Dutchess County Public Defender’s Office, should not have been disqualified; prosecution utilized “false hearsay testimony” in front of the grandjury which stated the gun used in the shooting had been wiped down when no test had been performed to show this was true; the court denied the defense from striking a juror before the jury was sworn in; and the court wrongfully denied evidence that could have shown Grover uploaded photographic proof of abusing Addimando to a p*rnographic website.
The court evaluated each of these claims and rejected them as grounds for overturning the conviction.
The appeals court agreed it was within the Dutchess court’s purview to decide if a lawyer should be disqualified, even when a defendant offers to waive a conflict of interest, as Addimando did in this case.
The court determined while “the admission of the subject hearsay testimony” was improper, it “did not impair the integrity of the grand jury proceeding to the extent that dismissal of the indictment was required.”
It also rejected the claim that the defense was not given proper opportunity to reject the juror in question, and said the website evidence “does not warrant reversal.”
Tendy stressed the importance of those rejections.
In a statement, Tendy said he was "still digesting the injustice in the remainder of the decision," which he said had little to do with the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act, which he called "a good and necessary law."
Instead, he said, the court "substituted itself for the jurors and the trial judge and believed all the defendant's uncorroborated claims about Mr. Grover — who by all accounts was a loving father, son and brother, an eternally patient domestic partner — and the one who was really the abused in this case."
