12 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Concepcion

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 5110 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 224 times
    Noting that New York Criminal Procedure Law Section 470.15 bars the Appellate Division "from affirming a judgment, sentence or order on a ground not decided adversely to the appellant by the trial court"
  2. People v. Muhammad

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 7302 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 183 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that acquittals on weapon possession counts "did not inherently negate" the element of "intent to cause serious physical injury" of first-degree assault by means of a weapon
  3. People v. Padro

    75 N.Y.2d 820 (N.Y. 1990)   Cited 158 times

    Argued January 4, 1990 Decided February 8, 1990 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Budd G. Goodman, J. Myron Beldock and Lee F. Bantle for appellant. Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Patrick J. Hynes and Donald J. Siewert of counsel), for respondent. Order affirmed. A postverdict motion made pursuant to CPL 330.30 is not, by itself, ordinarily sufficient to preserve a "question of law" within the meaning of CPL 470.05 (2) and inasmuch

  4. People v. Robinson

    36 N.Y.2d 224 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 131 times
    Holding that defendant's "failure to object to the [jury] charge . . . or to request further clarifications at a time when the error complained of could readily have been corrected preserved no questions of law reviewable" by the higher court
  5. People v. De Tore

    34 N.Y.2d 199 (N.Y. 1974)   Cited 115 times
    In People v. De Tore (34 N.Y.2d 199, 207), the Court of Appeals asserted in connection with the failure therein by the People to produce a witness that "it happens not infrequently that a prosecutor is unable to prove every statement made in his opening especially when he must rely on criminal characters.
  6. People v. Shawn Hunter

    17 N.Y.3d 725 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 29 times

    Argued April 28, 2011. Decided June 2, 2011. APPEAL, by permission of an Associate Judge of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, entered February 11, 2010. The Appellate Division affirmed a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Francis A. Affronti, J.), which had convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled

  7. People v. Johnson

    87 N.Y.2d 357 (N.Y. 1996)   Cited 50 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting a void-for-vagueness challenge to the depraved indifference murder statute, Penal Law section 125.25
  8. People v. Delee

    108 A.D.3d 1145 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)   Cited 11 times
    Modifying judgment because, “based on our review of the elements of the offenses as charged to the jury, we conclude that the verdict is inconsistent, i.e., ‘legally impossible,’ insofar as it finds defendant guilty of manslaughter in the first degree as a hate crime but not guilty of manslaughter in the first degree”
  9. People v. Mason

    101 A.D.3d 1659 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)   Cited 10 times
    In Mason, the jury's verdict was apparently illogical but not, as here, legally or theoretically impossible based on the elements of the offenses charged to the jury.
  10. People v. Robinson

    45 N.Y.2d 448 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 34 times
    In Robinson, the jury failed to comply with the court's instructions to consider the counts of criminal possession with intent to sell a controlled substance and the inclusory concurrent counts of simple possession in the alternative.
  11. Section 500.11 - Alternative procedure for selected appeals

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.11   Cited 536 times

    (a) On its own motion, the court may review selected appeals by an alternative procedure. Such appeals shall be determined on the intermediate appellate court record or appendix and briefs, the writings in the courts below and additional letter submissions on the merits. The clerk of the court shall notify all parties by letter when an appeal has been selected for review pursuant to this section. Appellant may request such review in its preliminary appeal statement. Respondent may request such review