38 Cited authorities

People v. Hawkins
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 9254 (N.Y. 2008) Cited 1,876 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that to preserve for appellate review a challenge to the legal sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction, a defendant must move for a trial order of dismissal, and the argument must be "specifically directed" at the error being argued
People v. Gray
86 N.Y.2d 10 (N.Y. 1995) Cited 3,228 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that the issue of evidentiary sufficiency must be preserved for appellate review
People v. Turner
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 8766 (N.Y. 2005) Cited 523 times 5 Legal Analyses
Finding appellate counsel ineffective for not raising ineffectiveness of trial counsel on appeal
People v. Jennings
69 N.Y.2d 103 (N.Y. 1986) Cited 763 times
In Jennings, the president of the insured (Sentry) received a check from Sentry's insurer to cover payments owed to the Sentry's clients as a result of losses incurred when the Sentry's warehouse was robbed.
People v. Mahboubian
74 N.Y.2d 174 (N.Y. 1989) Cited 557 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding prejudice where defendants's defenses "were not only antagonistic but also mutually exclusive and irreconcilable" and "[t]he jury could not have credited both defenses"
Faison v. Lewis
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 4026 (N.Y. 2015) Cited 166 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that contracts that are void ab initio , such as those where fraud in the factum is shown, are not subject to the statute of limitations
People v. Golb
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 3426 (N.Y. 2014) Cited 132 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding aggravated harassment statute in second degree as unconstitutionally vague and overly broad
People v. Edwards
95 N.Y.2d 486 (N.Y. 2000) Cited 129 times
In People v. Edwards, 95 N.Y.2d 486, 719 N.Y.S.2d 202, 741 N.E.2d 876 (2000), the Court of Appeals reached the merits of a probable cause issue, decided by the trial court at the close of a suppression hearing.
People v. Olivo
52 N.Y.2d 309 (N.Y. 1981) Cited 183 times
Finding sufficient evidence for petit larceny conviction where store security guard observed defendant conceal set of wrenches and pass cash registers without stopping to pay
People C. v. Jeanty
94 N.Y.2d 507 (N.Y. 2000) Cited 106 times
In Jeanty (supra), the defendant argued that the newly enacted "two hour rule" only applied if the court could not in any way contact the jurors and afford them an opportunity to explain their absence.

The People, Respondent,v.Fernando Maldonado, Appellant.

38 Cited authorities

Holding that to preserve for appellate review a challenge to the legal sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction, a defendant must move for a trial order of dismissal, and the argument must be "specifically directed" at the error being argued

Holding that the issue of evidentiary sufficiency must be preserved for appellate review

Finding appellate counsel ineffective for not raising ineffectiveness of trial counsel on appeal

In Jennings, the president of the insured (Sentry) received a check from Sentry's insurer to cover payments owed to the Sentry's clients as a result of losses incurred when the Sentry's warehouse was robbed.

Finding prejudice where defendants's defenses "were not only antagonistic but also mutually exclusive and irreconcilable" and "[t]he jury could not have credited both defenses"

Holding that contracts that are void ab initio , such as those where fraud in the factum is shown, are not subject to the statute of limitations

Holding aggravated harassment statute in second degree as unconstitutionally vague and overly broad

In People v. Edwards, 95 N.Y.2d 486, 719 N.Y.S.2d 202, 741 N.E.2d 876 (2000), the Court of Appeals reached the merits of a probable cause issue, decided by the trial court at the close of a suppression hearing.

Finding sufficient evidence for petit larceny conviction where store security guard observed defendant conceal set of wrenches and pass cash registers without stopping to pay

In Jeanty (supra), the defendant argued that the newly enacted "two hour rule" only applied if the court could not in any way contact the jurors and afford them an opportunity to explain their absence.