79 Cited authorities

Crawford v. Washington
541 U.S. 36 (2004) Cited 17,416 times 82 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause bars "admission of testimonial statements of a witness who did not appear at trial unless he was unavailable to testify, and the defendant had had a prior opportunity for cross-examination"
Davis v. Washington
547 U.S. 813 (2006) Cited 4,805 times 32 Legal Analyses
Holding that statements made "in the course of police interrogation" are testimonial when made under "circumstances objectively indicat[ing] ... that the primary purpose of the interrogation [was] to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution"
Melendez–Diaz v. Massachusetts
557 U.S. 305 (2009) Cited 3,554 times 46 Legal Analyses
Holding that a certification that material seized by the police included cocaine was testimonial
Michigan v. Bryant
562 U.S. 344 (2011) Cited 1,583 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that statements made to police concerning an ongoing emergency are not testimonial
Bullcoming v. New Mexico
564 U.S. 647 (2011) Cited 1,549 times 22 Legal Analyses
Holding a certification of the blood alcohol content of a sample to be testimonial
People v. Contes
60 N.Y.2d 620 (N.Y. 1983) Cited 11,959 times 2 Legal Analyses
Stating the standard for review of the legal sufficiency of evidence in a criminal case is whether "after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt"
People v. Mateo
2 N.Y.3d 383 (N.Y. 2004) Cited 3,447 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 . . ."
People v. Caban
5 N.Y.3d 143 (N.Y. 2005) Cited 1,639 times
Holding conspirators' statements admissible as verbal acts to prove existence of conspiracy but not, absent independent evidence of the conspiracy, for their truth
People v. Sandoval
34 N.Y.2d 371 (N.Y. 1974) Cited 2,458 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the trial court must balance the "probative worth of evidence of prior specific criminal, vicious or immoral acts on the issue of the defendant's credibility on the one hand, and on the other the risk of unfair prejudice to the defendant"
People v. Alvino
71 N.Y.2d 233 (N.Y. 1987) Cited 1,070 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that evidence of similar uncharged crimes is excluded for policy reasons because it may induce the jury to base a finding of guilt on collateral matters

The People, Respondent,v.Austin Cornelius, Appellant.

79 Cited authorities

Holding that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause bars "admission of testimonial statements of a witness who did not appear at trial unless he was unavailable to testify, and the defendant had had a prior opportunity for cross-examination"

Holding that statements made "in the course of police interrogation" are testimonial when made under "circumstances objectively indicat[ing] ... that the primary purpose of the interrogation [was] to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution"

Holding that a certification that material seized by the police included cocaine was testimonial

Holding that statements made to police concerning an ongoing emergency are not testimonial

Holding a certification of the blood alcohol content of a sample to be testimonial

Stating the standard for review of the legal sufficiency of evidence in a criminal case is whether "after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt"

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 . . ."

Holding conspirators' statements admissible as verbal acts to prove existence of conspiracy but not, absent independent evidence of the conspiracy, for their truth

Holding that the trial court must balance the "probative worth of evidence of prior specific criminal, vicious or immoral acts on the issue of the defendant's credibility on the one hand, and on the other the risk of unfair prejudice to the defendant"

Holding that evidence of similar uncharged crimes is excluded for policy reasons because it may induce the jury to base a finding of guilt on collateral matters