§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Respondent,v.Ricardo Ricketts, Appellant.

Brief

28 Cited authorities

  1. Delaware v. Van Arsdall

    475 U.S. 673 (1986)   Cited 7,273 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a restriction on defendant's ability to crossexamine witness in violation of Sixth Amendment was non-structural error

  2. Waller v. Georgia

    467 U.S. 39 (1984)   Cited 2,088 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a defendant's public trial right was violated even though the district court released a transcript of the closed proceedings to the public

  3. People v. Hawkins

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 9254 (N.Y. 2008)   Cited 1,875 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

  4. People v. Gray

    86 N.Y.2d 10 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 3,227 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the issue of evidentiary sufficiency must be preserved for appellate review

  5. People v. Crimmins

    36 N.Y.2d 230 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 5,683 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an error is prejudicial "if an appellate court concludes that there is a significant probability, rather than only a rational possibility, in the particular case that the jury would have acquitted the defendant had it not been for the error or errors which occurred"

  6. People v. Feingold

    2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 5233 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 347 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Ruling that depraved indifference to human life, rather than recklessness, is the applicable mens rea in statutes in which the former appears

  7. People v. Luperon

    85 N.Y.2d 71 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 339 times
    Finding an issue unpreserved because the legal grounds presented to the trial court in favor of a requested ruling differed from the legal grounds raised on appeal regarding the same ruling

  8. People v. Kello

    96 N.Y.2d 740 (N.Y. 2001)   Cited 191 times
    Holding that hearsay objection alone was insufficient to preserve Confrontation Clause objection

  9. People v. Martinez

    82 N.Y.2d 436 (N.Y. 1993)   Cited 229 times
    In Martinez the New York Court of Appeals in discussing Waller's third prong and rejecting defendant's contention that the court in closing the courtroom during the undercover officer's testimony should have asked the defendant to name family members or others who could have been admitted, emphasized that "[d]efendant's sole objection and the entire argument before the trial court was concentrated on the sufficiency of the People's showing for closure."

  10. People v. Schwartzman

    24 N.Y.2d 241 (N.Y. 1969)   Cited 452 times
    Holding that cross-examiner cannot contradict witness' answers concerning collateral matters by producing extrinsic evidence for sole purpose of impeaching credibility, but where evidence sought to be introduced is relevant to some issue in case other than credibility, or if evidence is independently admissible to impeach witness, it may be admitted