§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Respondent,v.Tyrell Ingram, Appellant.

Brief

45 Cited authorities

  1. Delaware v. Van Arsdall

    475 U.S. 673 (1986)   Cited 7,283 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a restriction on defendant's ability to crossexamine witness in violation of Sixth Amendment was non-structural error

  2. Davis v. Alaska

    415 U.S. 308 (1974)   Cited 5,691 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that this confrontation right is applicable to state and federal defendants alike

  3. People v. Crimmins

    36 N.Y.2d 230 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 5,688 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"

  4. People v. Lane

    2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 8641 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 458 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that claim of insufficiency of evidence was not preserved for appellate review

  5. People v. Gissendanner

    48 N.Y.2d 543 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 738 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Gissendanner, the court reviewed a lower court's denial of a defendant's request to issue a subpoena for the police personnel files of prosecution witnesses.

  6. People v. Hudy

    73 N.Y.2d 40 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 325 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In People v. Hudy, 73 N.Y.2d at 57, the Court of Appeals held that a trial court's preclusion of cross-examination questions regarding an investigating officer's testimony, coupled with the admission of a prior sexual allegation against the defendant, skewed the case in favor of the state and constituted reversible error.

  7. People v. Coleman

    206 Ill. 2d 261 (Ill. 2002)   Cited 183 times
    Holding that the State had no duty to reveal information that was irrelevant to any issue involved in defendant's case

  8. People v. Schwartzman

    24 N.Y.2d 241 (N.Y. 1969)   Cited 453 times
    Holding that cross-examiner cannot contradict witness' answers concerning collateral matters by producing extrinsic evidence for sole purpose of impeaching credibility, but where evidence sought to be introduced is relevant to some issue in case other than credibility, or if evidence is independently admissible to impeach witness, it may be admitted

  9. People v. Hayes

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 3887 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 103 times

    No. 79. Argued March 23, 2011. Decided May 10, 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 First Judicial Department, entered April 6, 2010. The Appellate Division affirmed a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald A. Zweibel, J.), which had convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree. People v Hayes

  10. People v. Thomas

    46 N.Y.2d 100 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 216 times
    Applying the same rule to evidence of personal hostility by a witness

  11. Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

    42 U.S.C. § 1983   Cited 486,409 times   688 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation