§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Appellant,v.Earl Canady, Respondent.

Brief

19 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Kendzia

    64 N.Y.2d 331 (N.Y. 1985)   Cited 585 times
    Holding that the time it takes to decide the defendant's speedy trial motion is excludable

  2. People v. Berkowitz

    50 N.Y.2d 333 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 557 times
    Holding that a conspiracy defendant whose sole alleged co-conspirator had been previously acquitted of the conspiracy charge could not utilize the doctrine of collateral estoppel as a bar to his own prosecution because that there will often be significant disparities in the proof available against each of two separately tried defendants and a verdict of acquittal is not necessarily a determination of innocence

  3. People v. Stirrup

    91 N.Y.2d 434 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 165 times
    Stating that criminal court obtains personal jurisdiction over defendant upon filing of accusatory instrument and defendant's appearance in court

  4. People v. Sinistaj

    67 N.Y.2d 236 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 222 times
    In People v Sinistaj (67 N.Y.2d 236), the Court of Appeals held that when a subsequent indictment is "related back" to the commencement of the proceeding, the exclusions applicable under CPL 30.30 (4) are "related back" as well.

  5. People v. Carter

    91 N.Y.2d 795 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 155 times
    In Carter, the court considered the implications of sending a statement of readiness to the wrong address for three defendants and found that the prosecution had attempted to notify the defendants at their last known address and "[i]n the absence of proof that the readiness statement did not accurately reflect the People's position or that the mailing was made in bad faith, the People had discharged their duty under CPL 30.30" (seeCarter at 799, 676 N.Y.S.2d 523, 699 N.E.2d 35 [emphasis added]).

  6. People v. Sibblies

    2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 2377 (N.Y. 2014)   Cited 93 times
    Holding statement of readiness invalid in light of People's subsequent statement of unreadiness based on the need to obtain medical records

  7. People v. Chavis

    91 N.Y.2d 500 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 139 times
    In People v. Chavis (91 N.Y.2d 500, 506), the Court again noted that "the People were able to toll the `speedy trial clock' by filing a notice of readiness".

  8. People v. Nieves

    67 N.Y.2d 125 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 195 times
    In Nieves, as in Tates, the theory argued by the People on appeal had been expressly disclaimed by the prosecutor during the evidentiary hearing (see People v Nieves, 67 N.Y.2d at 129-130).

  9. Deleon v. N.Y.C. Sanitation Dep't

    2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 4788 (N.Y. 2015)   Cited 82 times
    Finding the recklessness standard applicable for a street sweeper where the driver was operating the sweeper at the time of the accident

  10. People v. White

    73 N.Y.2d 468 (N.Y. 1989)   Cited 152 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding defendant has no right to submit a pro se supplemental brief if dissatisfied with the issues counsel has decided to raise on appeal