36 Cited authorities

  1. Washington v. Glucksberg

    521 U.S. 702 (1997)   Cited 2,619 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there is no fundamental right to physician-assisted suicide
  2. Obergefell v. Hodges

    576 U.S. 644 (2015)   Cited 841 times   60 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Fourteenth Amendment protects the right of same-sex couples to marry in light of doctrinal developments, as well as fundamentally changed social understanding
  3. Lawrence v. Texas

    539 U.S. 558 (2003)   Cited 1,149 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Holding statute that criminalizes two persons of same sex engaging in intimate sexual conduct unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment
  4. Leon v. Martinez

    84 N.Y.2d 83 (N.Y. 1994)   Cited 9,542 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the allegations in the complaint and the supporting affidavits were adequate to withstand a motion to dismiss
  5. Vacco v. Quill

    521 U.S. 793 (1997)   Cited 482 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that New York's assisted suicide law had a rational basis, therefore comporting with equal protection, despite its controversy among medical experts
  6. Markham v. Cabell

    326 U.S. 404 (1945)   Cited 343 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Markham v. Cabell, 326 U.S. 404, 409, 66 S.Ct. 193, 195, the Court said, "The policy as well as the letter of the law is a guide to decision.
  7. People v. LaValle

    3 N.Y.3d 88 (N.Y. 2004)   Cited 174 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Invalidating mandatory requirement to instruct the jury that, in the case of jury deadlock as to the appropriate sentence in a capital case, the defendant would receive a sentence of life imprisonment with parole eligibility after serving a minimum of 20 to 25 years
  8. Rivers v. Katz

    67 N.Y.2d 485 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 273 times
    Recognizing right of involuntarily committed patient to refuse unwanted administration of anti-psychotic medication
  9. Brooke S.B. v. Elizabeth A.C.C.

    2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 5903 (N.Y. 2016)   Cited 96 times
    Rejecting premise it must "declare that one test would be appropriate for all situations" and thus declining to decide whether, in a case where a biological or adoptive parent consented to the creation of a parent-like-relationship between his or her partner and child after conception, the partner would have standing
  10. People v. Scott

    79 N.Y.2d 474 (N.Y. 1992)   Cited 159 times
    Holding that N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 415-, which permitted the NYPD to conduct warrantless searches of vehicle-dismantling businesses, was unconstitutional under New York's Constitution
  11. Section 125.15 - Manslaughter in the second degree

    N.Y. Penal Law § 125.15   Cited 678 times
    Requiring only recklessness
  12. Section 1.05 - General purposes

    N.Y. Penal Law § 1.05   Cited 86 times

    The general purposes of the provisions of this chapter are: 1. To proscribe conduct which unjustifiably and inexcusably causes or threatens substantial harm to individual or public interests; 2. To give fair warning of the nature of the conduct proscribed and of the sentences authorized upon conviction; 3. To define the act or omission and the accompanying mental state which constitute each offense; 4. To differentiate on reasonable grounds between serious and minor offenses and to prescribe proportionate

  13. Section 120.30 - Promoting a suicide attempt

    N.Y. Penal Law § 120.30   Cited 19 times

    A person is guilty of promoting a suicide attempt when he intentionally causes or aids another person to attempt suicide. Promoting a suicide attempt is a class E felony. N.Y. Penal Law § 120.30

  14. Section 127.800 - Section 1.01. Definitions

    ORS § 127.800   Cited 16 times

    The following words and phrases, whenever used in ORS 127.800 to 127.897, have the following meanings: (1) "Adult" means an individual who is 18 years of age or older. (2) "Attending physician" means the physician who has primary responsibility for the care of the patient and treatment of the patient's terminal disease. (3) "Capable" means that in the opinion of a court or in the opinion of the patient's attending physician or consulting physician, psychiatrist or psychologist, a patient has the