People v. Finnegan
85 N.Y.2d 53 (N.Y. 1995) Cited 240 timesIn Finnegan, the Court of Appeals refused to read into another section of the VTL a requirement that the police affirmatively take certain steps, reasoning that because the Legislature did not impose such an obligation, the courts should not do so in the Legislature's place. Finnegan, 647 N.E.2d at 760-761.
People v. Mertz
68 N.Y.2d 136 (N.Y. 1986) Cited 166 timesConcluding that under per se statute, proof of BAC of .10% or more within two hours after arrest establishes prima facie evidence of driving under the influence which together with other evidence of intoxication is sufficient to sustain a conviction, absent evidence from which the trier of fact could conclude that the defendant was under .10% at the time of driving such as expert testimony
Heard v. Cuomo
80 N.Y.2d 684 (N.Y. 1993) Cited 30 timesIn Heard v Cuomo (80 N.Y.2d 684, 691, supra), the Court of Appeals held that "[Mental Hygiene Law § 29.15] requires that HHC take concrete steps to prescribe in the discharge plan the specific type of adequate and appropriate housing necessary for the about-to-be-discharged mentally ill patients; to assist in locating such adequate and appropriate housing before the patients are discharged from inpatient care; to discharge the patients in accordance with their individual written service plans that include the recommended housing; and to coordinate the effectuation of those efforts among the responsible entities.