§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Respondent,v.Edwin Mendez, Appellant.

Brief

42 Cited authorities

  1. Delaware v. Van Arsdall

    475 U.S. 673 (1986)   Cited 7,272 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a restriction on defendant's ability to crossexamine witness in violation of Sixth Amendment was non-structural error

  2. Crane v. Kentucky

    476 U.S. 683 (1986)   Cited 3,276 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an opportunity to present a complete defense "would be an empty one if the State were permitted to exclude competent, reliable evidence bearing on the credibility of a confession when such evidence is central to the defendant's claim of innocence"

  3. Chambers v. Mississippi

    410 U.S. 284 (1973)   Cited 5,975 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the application of the rule against hearsay to exclude exculpatory testimony violated the defendant's right to present a complete defense because the testimony was reliable

  4. People v. Lane

    2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 8641 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 458 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that claim of insufficiency of evidence was not preserved for appellate review

  5. People v. O'Rama

    78 N.Y.2d 270 (N.Y. 1991)   Cited 568 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding the defendant was prejudiced when the court failed to read a portion of the jury note stating jury was split "6/6," told counsel the jury was experiencing "continued disagreements," and subsequently issued a supplemental instruction urging a verdict

  6. People v. Hudy

    73 N.Y.2d 40 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 322 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In People v. Hudy, 73 N.Y.2d at 57, the Court of Appeals held that a trial court's preclusion of cross-examination questions regarding an investigating officer's testimony, coupled with the admission of a prior sexual allegation against the defendant, skewed the case in favor of the state and constituted reversible error.

  7. People v. Velasquez

    1 N.Y.3d 44 (N.Y. 2003)   Cited 164 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that a "presumption of regularity attaches to judicial proceedings," which "may be overcome only by substantial evidence," not mere speculation

  8. People v. Kinchen

    60 N.Y.2d 772 (N.Y. 1983)   Cited 260 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Kinchen, the Court of Appeals had held that a claim could not be properly considered where there was no proof in the record with regard to the defendant's allegations.

  9. People v. Kisoon

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 1194 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 132 times
    In People v. Kisoon, 8 N.Y.3d 129, 132, 831 N.Y.S.2d 738, 739 (2007), the New York Court of Appeals considered "whether a trial court committed a mode of proceedings error when it failed to disclose... a jury note."

  10. People v. Angelo

    88 N.Y.2d 217 (N.Y. 1996)   Cited 171 times
    Finding constitutional claims unpreserved where defendant did not present them to the state court when making his evidentiary objection