§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Appellant,v.Jamell R. McCullough, Respondent.

Brief

14 Cited authorities

  1. Frye v. United States

    293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923)   Cited 4,500 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Holding that expert testimony must be based on scientific methods that are sufficiently established and accepted

  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. LeGrand

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 2588 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 205 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there was insufficient evidence to confirm that the principles expounded by the defense expert witness on weapon focus were generally accepted by the relevant scientific community

  4. People v. Lee

    96 N.Y.2d 157 (N.Y. 2001)   Cited 221 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting a per se inadmissible rule

  5. People v. Drake

    7 N.Y.3d 28 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 75 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that trial court should instruct jurors that "if they accept the expert's testimony, they may consider it along with all other evidence in the case in determining whether the [state has] proved the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt"

  6. People v. Abney

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 7668 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 62 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the trial court should have conducted a Frye hearing on the issue of weapon focus

  7. People v. Santiago

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 7303 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 57 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing unconscious transference

  8. People v. Young

    7 N.Y.3d 40 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 63 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Describing the Appellate Division's finding with respect to the independent source issue as “an issue of fact” and holding that therefore the court “may not disturb” the Appellate Division's finding

  9. Young v. Conway

    715 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2013)   Cited 23 times
    Denying rehearing en banc

  10. Styles v. General Motors Corporation

    20 A.D.3d 338 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)   Cited 30 times

    M-2353, M-2418. July 21, 2005. Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Donna Mills, J.), entered October 1, 2002, after a jury trial, in favor of plaintiffs in the amount of $5,206,553, held in abeyance, and the matter remanded for a Frye hearing. Hanson Marek Bolkcom Greene, Ltd., Minneapolis, MN (Mary E. Bolkcom of counsel), and Herzfeld Rubin, P.C., New York, for appellant-respondent. Mauro Goldberg Lilling LLP, Great Neck (Barbara D. Goldberg of counsel), for respondents-appellants