§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Respondent,v.Roy S. Kangas, Appellant.

Brief

34 Cited authorities

  1. California v. Trombetta

    467 U.S. 479 (1984)   Cited 4,131 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Constitution does not require the state to preserve a breath sample used in a breath-analysis test in a DUI prosecution

  2. People v. Cratsley

    86 N.Y.2d 81 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 274 times
    Noting that lay witnesses may testify as to a party's capacity to make decisions and "the victim's ability to function in society"

  3. People v. Pealer

    2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 1019 (N.Y. 2013)   Cited 101 times
    Affirming breathalyzer testing certificates are not testimonial in part because they "do not directly inculpate defendant or prove an essential element of the charges against him"

  4. People v. DiSalvo

    284 A.D.2d 547 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)   Cited 110 times
    In People v DiSalvo (284 AD2d 547 [2Q01]) and Plymouth Rock Fuel Corp. v Leucadia, Inc. (117 AD2d 727), the Appellate Division allowed documents into evidence under the business records exception to the hearsay rule, even though the witness laying the foundation for their admission was a recipient of the records and did not have personal knowledge of the maker's practices and procedures, because there was a showing of meaningful incorporation and reliance.

  5. People v. Mertz

    68 N.Y.2d 136 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 166 times
    Concluding that under per se statute, proof of BAC of .10% or more within two hours after arrest establishes prima facie evidence of driving under the influence which together with other evidence of intoxication is sufficient to sustain a conviction, absent evidence from which the trier of fact could conclude that the defendant was under .10% at the time of driving such as expert testimony

  6. People v. Freycinet

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 5776 (N.Y. 2008)   Cited 81 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Concluding than an autopsy report was not testimonial, in part because the OCME is “by law, independent of and not subject to the control of the office of the prosecutor” and “not a law enforcement agency”

  7. People v. King

    232 A.D.2d 111 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)   Cited 75 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting an argument that a blood sample could not be used to investigate a second crime because "a defendant does not have a right to the automatic return of property seized in any criminal case absent a proper demand or some legal action"

  8. People v. Boscic

    15 N.Y.3d 494 (N.Y. 2010)   Cited 44 times
    Rejecting a per se six month periodic testing standard for alcohol testing devices

  9. People v. Fernandez

    2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 7145 (N.Y. 2012)   Cited 33 times

    2012-10-25 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Sandy FERNANDEZ, Appellant. Steven Banks, Legal Aid Society, New York City (Svetlana M. Kornfeind of counsel), for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn (Terry–Ann Corniffe and Leonard Joblove of counsel), for respondent. Steven Banks, Legal Aid Society, New York City (Svetlana M. Kornfeind of counsel), for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn (Terry–Ann Corniffe and Leonard Joblove of counsel),

  10. People v. Freeland

    68 N.Y.2d 699 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 79 times
    In People v Freeland (68 N.Y.2d 699), also subsequently decided, the Court of Appeals reversed a conviction based upon a breathalyzer test.