§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Respondent,v.William Rodriguez, Appellant.

Brief

27 Cited authorities

  1. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 158,593 times   176 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"

  2. Crawford v. Washington

    541 U.S. 36 (2004)   Cited 17,394 times   82 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause bars "admission of testimonial statements of a witness who did not appear at trial unless he was unavailable to testify, and the defendant had had a prior opportunity for cross-examination"

  3. Padilla v. Kentucky

    559 U.S. 356 (2010)   Cited 8,598 times   131 Legal Analyses
    Holding that counsel has a duty under the Sixth Amendment to inform a noncitizen defendant that his plea would make him eligible for deportation

  4. Melendez–Diaz v. Massachusetts

    557 U.S. 305 (2009)   Cited 3,545 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a certification that material seized by the police included cocaine was testimonial

  5. People v. Benevento

    91 N.Y.2d 708 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 4,212 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."

  6. People v. Baldi

    54 N.Y.2d 137 (N.Y. 1981)   Cited 5,974 times   6 Legal Analyses
    In Baldi, the New York State Court of Appeals expressly applied the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by the federal Constitution.

  7. People v. Caban

    5 N.Y.3d 143 (N.Y. 2005)   Cited 1,637 times
    Holding conspirators' statements admissible as verbal acts to prove existence of conspiracy but not, absent independent evidence of the conspiracy, for their truth

  8. 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

  9. People v. Brown

    45 N.Y.2d 852 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 477 times
    Holding that because, "[g]enerally, the ineffectiveness of counsel is not demonstrable on the main record,... it would be better, and in some cases essential, that an appellate attack on the effectiveness of counsel be bottomed on an evidentiary exploration by collateral or post-conviction proceedings brought under CPL 440.10"

  10. People v. Brown

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 8475 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 137 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "defendant's [statute of limitations] motion would have been meritless" under the tolling provision in C.P.L. § 30.10 and his counsel was not ineffective in raising it because the defendants identity could not have been known until the cold hit was made through the DNA backlog project