60 Cited authorities

  1. Maryland v. Buie

    494 U.S. 325 (1990)   Cited 2,012 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, incident to arrest, an officer may conduct a limited protective sweep of those areas of a house in which he reasonably suspects a dangerous person may be hiding
  2. People v. Benevento

    91 N.Y.2d 708 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 3,712 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-14 (1998), the New York Court of Appeals held that "meaningful representation" included a prejudice component which focuses on the "fairness of the process as a whole rather than [any] particular impact on the outcome of the case."
  3. Griffin v. United States

    502 U.S. 46 (1991)   Cited 977 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that refusal to remove an insufficiently supported theory from the jury's consideration does not provide an independent basis for reversing an otherwise valid conviction
  4. People v. Crimmins

    36 N.Y.2d 230 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 5,175 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"
  5. People v. De Bour

    40 N.Y.2d 210 (N.Y. 1976)   Cited 2,072 times   6 Legal Analyses
    In People v. LaPene, 352 N.E.2d 562 (N.Y. 1976), the New York Court of Appeals laid out a sliding scale of justifiable police intrusion, short of probable cause to arrest, which specified three distinct levels of intrusion correlating the allowable intensity of police conduct to the nature and weight of the facts precipitating the intrusion.
  6. People v. Prochilo

    41 N.Y.2d 759 (N.Y. 1977)   Cited 1,519 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In People v Prochilo (41 N.Y.2d 759, 763), even though the police officer was able to observe a visibly heavy object in defendant Bernard's pocket, we ordered the gun suppressed, in part because the officer was completely unable to connect his observations with the presence of a weapon until after he had taken the impermissible step of reaching into the pocket.
  7. People v. Alvino

    71 N.Y.2d 233 (N.Y. 1987)   Cited 990 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that evidence of similar uncharged crimes is excluded for policy reasons because it may induce the jury to base a finding of guilt on collateral matters
  8. People v. Hobot

    84 N.Y.2d 1021 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 359 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Argued November 30, 1994 Decided January 17, 1995 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, Alan D. Marrus, J. Leighton M. Jackson, Brooklyn, for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney of Kings County, Brooklyn (Ruth E. Ross, Jay M. Cohen and Roseann B. MacKechnie of counsel), for respondent. MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. After a jury trial, defendant was convicted of two counts of rape in the first degree

  9. People v. Cantor

    36 N.Y.2d 106 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 666 times
    Stating that officers are permitted to forcibly stop and detain a person for questioning where the officer has reasonable suspicion that a suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime
  10. People v. Halm

    81 N.Y.2d 819 (N.Y. 1993)   Cited 299 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding sentence for sodomy when sentencing judge referred to "Biblical times" and expressed his opinion about the seriousness of the crime
  11. Section 470.05 - Determination of appeals; general criteria

    N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 470.05   Cited 13,223 times
    Codifying the "contemporaneous objection rule" which requires a party to raise the issue sought to be preserved for appeal before the trial court at the earliest possible juncture
  12. Section 220.25 - Criminal possession of a controlled substance; presumption

    N.Y. Penal Law § 220.25   Cited 323 times

    1. The presence of a controlled substance in an automobile, other than a public omnibus, is presumptive evidence of knowing possession thereof by each and every person in the automobile at the time such controlled substance was found; except that such presumption does not apply (a) to a duly licensed operator of an automobile who is at the time operating it for hire in the lawful and proper pursuit of his trade, or (b) to any person in the automobile if one of them, having obtained the controlled

  13. Section 470.35 - Determination by court of appeals of appeals from orders of intermediate appellate courts; scope of review

    N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 470.35   Cited 85 times

    1. Upon an appeal to the court of appeals from an order of an intermediate appellate court affirming a judgment, sentence or order of a criminal court, the court of appeals may consider and determine not only questions of law which were raised or considered upon the appeal to the intermediate appellate court, but also any question of law involving alleged error or defect in the criminal court proceedings resulting in the original criminal court judgment, sentence or order, regardless of whether such