Man convicted of shooting at Schenectady cops seeks new trial

Adrian Parbhudial looks at defense attorney Roy Nestler during Parbhudial's sentencing in Schenectady County Court in 2011.

A city man convicted of firing on police officers during a raid in 2010 should get a new trial, his attorney argued Tuesday, because prosecutors focused too much on an underlying murder case.

The Schenectady County District Attorney’s Office countered in arguments before the Appellate Division of the state Supreme Court that the trial judge properly admitted the testimony as it proved the central accusations of the case, that the man knowingly fired on police officers.

The arguments Tuesday concerned the case of Adrian Parbhudial, now 30. A Schenectady County Court jury convicted him in 2011 of attempted aggravated murder for firing a shotgun blast at officers raiding his family’s Maple Avenue home Feb. 21, 2010. He received 40 years to life in state prison.

The jury found he fired on the officers from a hidden stairway as police raided the building looking for evidence in a murder investigation. The blast of No. 8 bird shot hit two officers. Police equipment, including body armor, prevented serious injury.

Police raided the home as part of their investigation into the gunshot slaying of Ganesh Ramgoolam days earlier near the home. Police ultimately charged four members of Parbhudial’s family related to the Ramgoolam killing, but not Adrian Parbhudial himself.

Parbhudial’s attorney, George J. Hoffman Jr,. argued the focus of the trial should have been on the raid, not the previous murder. Instead, the trial turned into more than three weeks about the murder and just four days on the raid.

“Clearly this as solely done in an attempt to inflame the jury in this matter,” Hoffman told the Appellate Division Tuesday. “And it in fact worked because the jury in a matter of hours reached their verdict after hearing nearly four weeks of testimony.”

The jury asked for no testimony to be read back or for instructions to be repeated, Hoffman said.

Hoffman argued that lesser charges against Parbhudial of perjury, hindering prosecution and making a false statement should have been tried separately as those charges focused more on the prior murder investigation.

“The crucial fact is that [Parbhudial] wasn’t even involved in the underlying murder at all,” Hoffman argued.

Peter Willis argued for the Schenectady County District Attorney’s Office that Parbhudial’s defense asked too late for the lesser counts to be separated and that they didn’t renew that argument at trial.

Hoffman, in rebuttal, argued the defense did renew the argument.

Hoffman also objected to Parbhudial’s sentence — 40 years to life — calling it excessively harsh. He argued neither officer was injured and that the individuals charged in the underlying murder case didn’t receive as much time as Parbhudial received.

One pleaded guilty to murder and received 18 years to life, the other three pleaded guilty to gang assault and received between five and 10 years in prison.