People v. Mangione (NY)

Following Mangione's December 9, 2024 arrest, the Manhattan District Attorney's Office secured a New York County grand-jury indictment of eleven counts: first-degree murder in furtherance of an act of terrorism (NY Penal Law § 125.27), second-degree murder as a crime of terrorism, second-degree intentional murder, and eight weapons-related offenses. The first-degree murder count rested entirely on the terrorism theory — under New York law an intentional killing is elevated to first-degree murder only in narrow circumstances — with prosecutors alleging the killing was committed 'with intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population' and pointing to writings attributed to Mangione expressing a desire to broadcast a message about the U.S. health-insurance system.

On September 16, 2025, Justice Gregory Carro dismissed both terrorism counts — the first-degree murder count and the second-degree-murder-as-a-crime-of-terrorism count — finding the evidence of terroristic intent legally insufficient. The court wrote that the People 'presented sufficient evidence that the defendant murdered Brian Thompson in a premeditated and calculated execution,' but that this 'does not mean … that the defendant did so with terroristic intent,' noting no evidence that he made demands of government or sought a policy change through intimidation or coercion. Nine counts remained, with second-degree intentional murder — carrying a sentence of 25 years to life — as the top charge; the District Attorney's Office said it would proceed on the remaining nine counts.

Justice Carro has presided over the pretrial proceedings. On June 18, 2026, lead defense counsel Karen Friedman Agnifilo notified the court that the defense was withdrawing its NY CPL § 250.10 notice of intent to introduce evidence of extreme emotional disturbance (EED), an affirmative defense that, if accepted by a jury, would reduce second-degree murder to manslaughter.

The New York case originally included a first-degree murder count on the theory that the killing was an act of terrorism — a charge invoked only rarely in New York, where the terrorism statute (Penal Law Article 490) was enacted after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Justice Carro's September 16, 2025 dismissal of that count turned on the scope of that statute: he reasoned that a targeted, premeditated killing of a single individual is categorically different from the 'intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population' the statute requires, and observed that federal prosecutors — though the federal terrorism statute served as a model for New York’s — had likewise charged Mangione with firearm and stalking offenses rather than terrorism.

The case also illustrates the strategic interaction between parallel state and federal prosecutions on the same facts. The June 18, 2026 withdrawal of the defense's EED notice — one day after it was filed — raised questions about that interaction, since the federal statutes at issue do not recognize extreme emotional disturbance as an affirmative defense.