§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Appellant,v.Dru Allard, Respondent.

Brief

54 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Berkowitz

    50 N.Y.2d 333 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 558 times
    Holding that a conspiracy defendant whose sole alleged co-conspirator had been previously acquitted of the conspiracy charge could not utilize the doctrine of collateral estoppel as a bar to his own prosecution because that there will often be significant disparities in the proof available against each of two separately tried defendants and a verdict of acquittal is not necessarily a determination of innocence

  2. People v. Luperon

    85 N.Y.2d 71 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 341 times
    Finding an issue unpreserved because the legal grounds presented to the trial court in favor of a requested ruling differed from the legal grounds raised on appeal regarding the same ruling

  3. People v. Hecker

    2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 8766 (N.Y. 2010)   Cited 198 times
    Holding that mistaken denial of a peremptory challenge "under New York law mandates automatic reversal," despite the United States Supreme Court's holding in Rivera

  4. People v. Payne

    88 N.Y.2d 172 (N.Y. 1996)   Cited 266 times
    In Payne, the Court of Appeals held that a trial court may render a ruling of purposeful discrimination "without hearing more discussion from either or each side" after the striking party has proffered its race-neutral reasons.

  5. People v. Santos

    68 N.Y.2d 859 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 299 times

    Argued September 10, 1986 Decided October 14, 1986 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Alfred H. Kleiman, J. Oren Root, Jr., and Patrick M. Wall for appellant. Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Jeffrey Scott Sarokin and Norman Barclay of counsel), for respondent. MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be modified to the extent of remitting the case to Supreme Court, New York County, for a hearing on the branch of defendant's

  6. People v. Carrasquillo

    54 N.Y.2d 248 (N.Y. 1981)   Cited 339 times
    In Carrasquillo the court held that the right of inquiry was triggered when the unkempt suspect, carrying a bag, made a quick turn. Only when the suspect gave a straightforward, co-operative, and plausible response to the inquiry and was brought to the police station did an improper detention occur.

  7. People v. Singer

    44 N.Y.2d 241 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 328 times
    Providing a defendant with a pre-trial hearing to determine whether a pre-indictment delay was reasonable

  8. Matter of State of N.Y. v. King

    36 N.Y.2d 59 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 323 times
    In King, then-Chief Judge Breitel, writing for a unanimous Court, concluded that prohibition did not lie to preempt an egregious, prejudicial and unreviewable error of law involving a trial court grant of excessive peremptory challenges in a criminal action (id., at 61-62).

  9. People v. Stevens

    91 N.Y.2d 270 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 143 times
    In People v Stevens (91 NY2d 270) and People v Kearns (95 NY2d 816), we held that the registration and notification requirements of SORA — regardless whether the specific risk level determination was made at the time of sentencing or post-judgment — are not a "traditional, technical or integral part of a sentence" that becomes incorporated within the judgment of conviction (Stevens, 91 NY2d at 276; Kearns, 95 NY2d at 818).

  10. People v. Beasley

    16 N.Y.3d 289 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 77 times

    Jeremy Gutman, New York City, for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn (Ann Bordley and Leonard Joblove of counsel), for respondent. OPINION CIPARICK, J. On May 5, 2005, defendant Lamont Beasley was arraigned on a felony complaint charging him with criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and lesser offenses. The matter was presented to a grand jury and, on May 27, 2005, an indictment was filed and the People announced their readiness for trial. On June