36 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Glover

    57 N.Y.2d 61 (N.Y. 1982)   Cited 891 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 322 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. People v. Heide

    84 N.Y.2d 943 (N.Y. 1994)   Cited 240 times
    Holding that prosecutorial misconduct claim was unpreserved where defense counsel failed to object further or request a mistrial after court issued curative instructions
  4. Policano v. Herbert

    2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 8284 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 170 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the governing law is the law at the time the petitioner's conviction became final
  5. People v. Green

    56 N.Y.2d 427 (N.Y. 1982)   Cited 318 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 246 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. Edwards

    95 N.Y.2d 486 (N.Y. 2000)   Cited 128 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.
  8. People v. Butts

    72 N.Y.2d 746 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 173 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.

  9. People v. Van Norstrand

    85 N.Y.2d 131 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 110 times
    Finding that the jury could infer defendant lacked the requisite mens rea for first-degree assault
  10. People v. Steele

    26 N.Y.2d 526 (N.Y. 1970)   Cited 194 times
    Holding that defendant, charged with assault, was entitled to an instruction on defense of a third person, despite his testimony that he was not even at the scene of the crime; on the particular record before the court, the prosecution's witnesses created the opportunity for the defense; "[s]ince a jury might disbelieve the alibi and still find, on the prosecution's evidence, that defendant acted justifiably, the prosecution claim of inconsistent defenses is not a bar to the charge requested"