36 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Glover

    57 N.Y.2d 61 (N.Y. 1982)   Cited 856 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Glover (57 NY2d at 63), we established a two-pronged test to determine when a defendant is entitled to have a lesser included offense charged.
  2. People v. Suarez

    2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 9811 (N.Y. 2005)   Cited 307 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding depraved indifference charge was not appropriate where defendant intended to kill an individual and did kill that individual, even if the killing was done in a depraved manner.
  3. Policano v. Herbert

    859 N.E.2d 484 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 165 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the governing law is the law at the time the petitioner's conviction became final
  4. People v. Heide

    84 N.Y.2d 943 (N.Y. 1994)   Cited 222 times
    Holding that prosecutorial misconduct claim was unpreserved where defense counsel failed to object further or request a mistrial after court issued curative instructions
  5. People v. Green

    56 N.Y.2d 427 (N.Y. 1982)   Cited 311 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that lower mental states are "necessarily subsumed within the higher mental states"
  6. People v. Scarborough

    49 N.Y.2d 364 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 235 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the submission of a lesser included offense is improper if there is no reasonable view of the evidence that would allow a jury to conclude that the defendant committed the lesser but not the greater crime
  7. People v. Butts

    72 N.Y.2d 746 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 156 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Argued November 18, 1988 Decided December 20, 1988 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Herman Cahn, J. Martha Krisel and Philip L. Weinstein for appellant. Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Paul Schectman and Mark Dwyer of counsel), for respondent. HANCOCK, JR., J. The dispositive question in this appeal is whether the evidence at trial reasonably supported defendant's request for a jury charge on the affirmative defense of entrapment.

  8. People v. Edwards

    95 N.Y.2d 486 (N.Y. 2000)   Cited 105 times
    In People v. Edwards, 95 N.Y.2d 486, 719 N.Y.S.2d 202, 741 N.E.2d 876 (2000), the Court of Appeals reached the merits of a probable cause issue, decided by the trial court at the close of a suppression hearing.
  9. People v. Van Norstrand

    85 N.Y.2d 131 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 103 times

    Argued January 10, 1995 Decided February 16, 1995 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, Stephen R. Sirkin, J. Ronald C. Valentine, Public Defender of Wayne County (Peter J. Pullano, Rochester, of counsel), for appellant. Richard M. Healey, District Attorney of Wayne County, Lyons (Valerie Friedlander, Albany, of counsel), for respondent. CIPARICK, J. The issue presented on this appeal is whether the trial court committed reversible error by denying

  10. People v. Henderson

    41 N.Y.2d 233 (N.Y. 1976)   Cited 158 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In People v. Henderson (41 N.Y.2d 233, 235), the rule was reiterated: "One of these conditions is that the relationship of the alternative crimes to one another must be such that it is `impossible to commit a particular crime without concomitantly committing, by the same conduct, another offense of lesser grade or degree', the statutory definition of a `lesser included offense' (CPL 1.20, subd 37).