§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Appellant,v.William Morrison, Respondent.

Brief

21 Cited authorities

  1. People v. O'Rama

    78 N.Y.2d 270 (N.Y. 1991)   Cited 571 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

  2. People v. Linares

    2 N.Y.3d 507 (N.Y. 2004)   Cited 296 times
    Affirming conviction and rejecting defendant's argument that he was entitled to a new trial because he was denied substitute counsel after he threatened his attorney, who nonetheless proceeded to represent him

  3. 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

  4. People v. Mack

    2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 4321 (N.Y. 2016)   Cited 110 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Mack, the Court of Appeals made clear that a court should follow a two-step process when it receives a jury note: (1) give counsel notice that a note has been received; and (2) meaningfully respond to the note.

  5. 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."

  6. People v. Ferguson

    67 N.Y.2d 383 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 189 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defense counsel validly waived a double jeopardy claim by assenting to a mistrial when defendant was not consulted or present

  7. People v. Santorelli

    95 N.Y.2d 412 (N.Y. 2000)   Cited 102 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that district attorney did not violate Brady obligations by failing to turn over FBI 302s because the reports were not in the actual possession of the district attorney, the federal authorities refused to allow the district attorney access to the reports, and the trial court made a finding that the federal and state investigators acted independently

  8. People v. Silva

    2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 8215 (N.Y. 2014)   Cited 63 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In People v. Silva, 24 N.Y.3d 294, 998 N.Y.S.2d 154, 22 N.E.3d 1022 [2014] and People v. Hanson, 24 N.Y.3d 294, 998 N.Y.S.2d 154, 22 N.E.3d 1022 [2014], the Court of Appeals held that the trial courts committed mode of proceedings errors by failing to notify counsel of jury notes before the juries in each case reached their verdicts, even though the transcripts in both cases failed to establish whether the courts were aware that the notes had been submitted.

  9. People v. Hanley

    2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 2106 (N.Y. 2013)   Cited 44 times

    2013-03-28 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Kirk HANLEY, Appellant. Dechert LLP, New York City (Matthew L. Mazur and Robert J. Jossen of counsel), and Office of the Appellate Defender (Richard M. Greenberg of counsel) for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York City (Gina Mignola and Alan Gadlin of counsel), for respondent. GRAFFEO Dechert LLP, New York City (Matthew L. Mazur and Robert J. Jossen of counsel), and Office of the Appellate Defender (Richard M.

  10. People v. Glass

    43 N.Y.2d 283 (N.Y. 1977)   Cited 128 times

    Argued November 17, 1977 Decided December 19, 1977 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, CULVER K. BARR, J. Edward J. Nowak, Public Defender, for appellant. Lawrence T. Kurlander, District Attorney (Stephen M. Brent of counsel), for respondent. FUCHSBERG, J. The defendant was convicted of burglary and grand larceny after a jury trial. Subsequent to the filing of a notice of appeal, it was discovered that the stenographer who recorded the proceedings

  11. Section 500.1 - General requirements

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.1   Cited 1 times

    (a) All papers shall comply with applicable statutes and rules, particularly the signing requirement of section 130-1.1 -a of this Title. (b) Papers filed. Papers filed means briefs, papers submitted pursuant to sections 500.10 and 500.11 of this Part, motion papers, records and appendices. (c) Method of reproduction. All papers filed may be reproduced by any method that produces a permanent, legible, black image on white paper. Reproduction on both sides of the paper is encouraged. (d) Designation