§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Appellant,v.Ganesh R. Ramsaran, Respondent.

Brief

100 Cited authorities

  1. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 158,554 times   176 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"

  2. Holmes v. South Carolina

    547 U.S. 319 (2006)   Cited 1,896 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a rule that categorically barred evidence of third-party guilt when strong forensic evidence of the defendant's guilt was presented "is arbitrary in the sense that it does not rationally serve the end that ... [it was] designed to further"

  3. Chambers v. Mississippi

    410 U.S. 284 (1973)   Cited 5,974 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the application of the rule against hearsay to exclude exculpatory testimony violated the defendant's right to present a complete defense because the testimony was reliable

  4. People v. Mateo

    2 N.Y.3d 383 (N.Y. 2004)   Cited 3,444 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding criminal liability attaches to "a person concerned in the commission of a crime whether he directly commits the act constituting the offense or aids and abets in its commission . . ."

  5. People v. Benevento

    91 N.Y.2d 708 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 4,212 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-14 (1998), the New York Court of Appeals held that "meaningful representation" included a prejudice component which focuses on the "fairness of the process as a whole rather than [any] particular impact on the outcome of the case."

  6. People v. Baldi

    54 N.Y.2d 137 (N.Y. 1981)   Cited 5,974 times   6 Legal Analyses
    In Baldi, the New York State Court of Appeals expressly applied the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by the federal Constitution.

  7. People v. Crimmins

    36 N.Y.2d 230 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 5,682 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"

  8. People v. Rivera

    71 N.Y.2d 705 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 1,828 times
    Holding petitioner who failed to show "the absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations" for counsels' alleged shortcoming did not have viable claim to constitutionally ineffective counsel

  9. People v. Love

    57 N.Y.2d 998 (N.Y. 1982)   Cited 627 times
    Holding that where the ineffectiveness claim involves matters outside the record, the court "cannot conclude that defendant's counsel was ineffective simply by reviewing the trial record without the benefit of additional background facts that might have been developed had an appropriate after-judgment motion been made pursuant to CPL 440.10"

  10. People v. Hobot

    84 N.Y.2d 1021 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 363 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Argued November 30, 1994 Decided January 17, 1995 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, Alan D. Marrus, J. Leighton M. Jackson, Brooklyn, for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney of Kings County, Brooklyn (Ruth E. Ross, Jay M. Cohen and Roseann B. MacKechnie of counsel), for respondent. MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. After a jury trial, defendant was convicted of two counts of rape in the first degree