16 Cited authorities

  1. Arizona v. Youngblood

    488 U.S. 51 (1988)   Cited 3,241 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding there was no denial of due process when police, while investigating a sexual assault, failed to refrigerate the victim's clothing and perform tests on semen samples where there was no suggestion of bad faith by the police and that such conduct was "at worst" negligence
  2. People v. Crimmins

    36 N.Y.2d 230 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 5,186 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"
  3. People v. Gonzalez

    68 N.Y.2d 424 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 924 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In People v Gonzalez (68 NY2d 424 [1986]), we set forth the conditions necessary to warrant a missing witness charge and a burden-shifting analysis to determine whether those conditions are met.
  4. Clewis v. Texas

    386 U.S. 707 (1967)   Cited 460 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding third confession suspect gave, nine days after being arrested, was involuntary because there was "no break in the stream of events" beginning when police first arrested the suspect
  5. People v. Whalen

    59 N.Y.2d 273 (N.Y. 1983)   Cited 435 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Whalen, the defendant argued that identification evidence is "always suspect, so that, when a trial involves a close question of identity, the jury should receive an instruction emphasizing the scrutiny to be given to such evidence.
  6. Commonwealth v. DiGiambattista

    442 Mass. 423 (Mass. 2004)   Cited 166 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when the prosecution introduces evidence of a defendant's custodial confession and there is not an audio recording of the complete interrogation, upon request, the defendant is entitled to a cautionary instruction "that the State's highest court has expressed a preference that such interrogations be recorded," and the jury should weigh "the evidence of the defendant's alleged statement with great caution and care"
  7. People v. Kitching

    78 N.Y.2d 532 (N.Y. 1991)   Cited 177 times

    Argued October 17, 1991 Decided November 26, 1991 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, Pearle Appelman, J. Robert P. App and Philip L. Weinstein for appellant. John J. Santucci, District Attorney (Stephanie D. Schwartz and Spiros A. Tsimbinos of counsel), for respondent. HANCOCK, JR., J. Defendant was arrested for selling $10 worth of crack/cocaine to an undercover officer. Following a jury trial, he was convicted of criminal sale of a controlled

  8. People v. Thomas

    2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 1208 (N.Y. 2014)   Cited 77 times
    In Thomas, the New York state appellate court, unconstrained by the deferential review required under the AEDPA, ruled that, because the defendant's custodial interrogation was coercive, his motion to suppress statements was granted and a new trial ordered.
  9. People v. Handy

    2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 2103 (N.Y. 2013)   Cited 67 times
    In Handy, a police surveillance system created a series of images depicting a portion of the defendant's alleged jailhouse assault on some sheriff's deputies, and those images remained in the possession of the police (see id. at 666, 966 N.Y.S.2d 351, 988 N.E.2d 879).
  10. People v. Saunders

    474 N.E.2d 610 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 112 times

    Argued November 12, 1984 Decided December 11, 1984 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, John R. Starkey, J. Elizabeth Holtzman, District Attorney ( Evan Wolfson and Barbara D. Underwood of counsel), for appellant. Edwin Ira Schulman for respondents. MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the matter remitted to it for a review of the facts (CPL 470.25, subd 2, par [d]; 470.40, subd 2, par [b]) and for consideration