§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Respondent,v.Ronel Joseph, Appellant.

Brief

27 Cited authorities

  1. State v. Danielson

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 9814 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 9,445 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding a "legally sufficient verdict can be against the weight of the evidence"

  2. People v. Romero

    2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 8640 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 4,924 times

    No. 151. Argued October 18, 2006. Decided November 21, 2006. 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 October 11, 2005. The Appellate Division affirmed a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Leslie Crocker Snyder, J.), which had convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of two counts of murder in the second degree. People v. Romero, 22 AD3d 287, affirmed. Center

  3. People v. Bleakley

    69 N.Y.2d 490 (N.Y. 1987)   Cited 11,291 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Appellate Division committed reversible error when it "avoid[ed] its exclusive statutory authority to review the weight of the evidence in criminal cases"

  4. People v. Malizia

    62 N.Y.2d 755 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 857 times
    In People v. Malizia, 62 NY2d 755 [1984], the Court of Appeals held that the evidentiary rulings of a first trial did not automatically apply to a second trial (see People v. Nieves, 67 NY 125 [1986]).

  5. People v. Delamota

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 8225 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 285 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Expressing skepticism about lineup procedures because, among other concerns, family member with prior exposure to perpetrator had to translate for witness

  6. People v. Mahboubian

    74 N.Y.2d 174 (N.Y. 1989)   Cited 556 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding prejudice where defendants's defenses "were not only antagonistic but also mutually exclusive and irreconcilable" and "[t]he jury could not have credited both defenses"

  7. People v. Kennedy

    47 N.Y.2d 196 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 361 times
    Noting that “cases involving circumstantial evidence must be closely reviewed because they often require the jury to undertake a more complex and problematical reasoning process than do cases based on direct evidence”

  8. People v. Gaines

    74 N.Y.2d 358 (N.Y. 1989)   Cited 168 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, to establish a burglary charge, the prosecutor must prove that the defendant's intent to commit a crime existed at the time he or she entered the premises unlawfully

  9. People v. Mackey

    49 N.Y.2d 274 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 216 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating "unless there is read into the words `a crime' more than the Legislature has stated, intent to commit a specific crime is not an element, and the necessity for particulars, and with it the due process question, disappears"

  10. People v. Samuels

    99 N.Y.2d 20 (N.Y. 2002)   Cited 94 times

    14014102 Argued October 9, 2002. Decided November 14, 2002. APPEALS, by permission of a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, from an order of that Court, entered May 22, 2001, which affirmed two judgments of the Supreme Court (Laura Visitacion-Lewis, J.), rendered in New York County upon a verdict convicting each defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. Lisa Joy Robertson, for appellant. Donald J. Siewert, for respondent