green
Positive treatment
5.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "but see"
Jae-Woo Cha v. Korean Presbyterian Church
But see Moses v. Diocese of Colorado, 863 P.2d 310, 319-21 (Colo. 1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1137 (1994); Marshall v. Munro, 845 P.2d 424, 429 (Alaska 1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
SANFORD, JR., ROSS, PEOPLE v
“Where the court’s jury instruction on a particular count erroneously contains an additional theory that differs from the theory alleged in the indictment . . . and the evidence adduced at trial could have established either theory, reversal of the conviction on that count is required because there is a possibility that the jury could have convicted the defendant upon the uncharged theory” (Graves, 136 AD3d at 1348 ; see People v Martinez, 83 NY2d 26, 32-35 , cert denied 511 US 1137 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Sanford
“Where the court’s jury instruction on a particular count erroneously contains an additional theory that differs from the theory alleged in the indictment . . . and the evidence adduced at trial could have established either theory, reversal of the conviction on that count is required because there is a possibility that the jury could have convicted the defendant upon the uncharged theory” (Graves, 136 AD3d at 1348 ; see People v Martinez, 83 NY2d 26, 32-35 [1993], cert denied 511 US 1137 [1994]).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Sanford
“Where the court’s jury instruction on a particular count erroneously contains an additional theory that differs from the theory alleged in the indictment . . . and the evidence adduced at trial could have established either theory, reversal of the conviction on that count is required because there is a possibility that the jury could have convicted the defendant upon the uncharged theory” (Graves, 136 AD3d at 1348 ; see People v Martinez, 83 NY2d 26, 32-35 [1993], cert denied 511 US 1137 [1994]).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Simmons
Since this error was not harmless (cf. People v Brown, 87 NY2d 950, 951 [1996]; People v Cahill, 2 NY3d at 64-65; see generally People v Brian, 84 NY2d 887, 889 [1994]), and it is impossible to determine whether the jury relied on the defendant’s intent to kill the victim or instead to commit some other crime (see People v Martinez, 83 NY2d 26, 32 [1993], cert denied 511 US 1137 [1994], citing Griffin v United States, 502 US 46, 51-55 [1991]), the Supreme Court properly reduced the defendant’s conviction from murder in the first degree to murder in the second degree.
cited
Cited "see"
Nicks v. State
See Watkins v. State , 632 So.2d 555 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992) (Taylor, J., dissenting.), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1137 , 114 S.Ct. 2153 , 128 L.Ed.2d 880 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
Gibson v. Brewer
See Moses v. Diocese of Colorado, 863 P.2d 310 (Colo.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1137 , 114 S.Ct. 2153 , 128 L.Ed.2d 880 (1994); Destefano v. Grabrian, 763 P.2d 275 (Colo.1988); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Konkle v. Henson, 672 N.E.2d 450 (Ind.App.1996); Erickson v. Christenson, 99 Or.App. 104 , 781 P.2d 383 (1989); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (Sup.1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Medeiros
“Failure to so charge the jury was necessarily harmful error” (People v Jenner, 29 NY2d 695, 696-697 [1971] [citation omitted]; accord People v Minarich, 46 NY2d 970, 971 [1979]; see People v Adams, 307 AD2d at 478 ; People v Artis, 182 AD2d 1011, 1013 [1992]; People v Arnott, 143 AD2d 761, 763 [1988]; see also People v Martinez, 83 NY2d 26, 35-36 [1993], cert denied 511 US 1137 [1994]).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Medeiros
“Failure to so charge the jury was necessarily harmful error” (People v Jenner, 29 NY2d 695, 696-697 [1971] [citation omitted]; accord People v Minarich, 46 NY2d 970, 971 [1979]; see People v Adams, 307 AD2d at 478 ; People v Artis, 182 AD2d 1011, 1013 [1992]; People v Arnott, 143 AD2d 761, 763 [1988]; see also People v Martinez, 83 NY2d 26, 35-36 [1993], cert denied 511 US 1137 [1994]).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Credel
There is no reasonable possibility that the jury based its verdict on an improper theory (see People v Ray, 254 AD2d 189 [1st Dept 1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 985 [1998]; compare People v Martinez, 83 NY2d 26, 33-34 [1993], cert denied 511 US 1137 [1994]).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Credel
There is no reasonable possibility that the jury based its verdict on an improper theory (see People v Ray, 254 AD2d 189 [1st Dept 1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 985 [1998]; compare People v Martinez, 83 NY2d 26, 33-34 [1993], cert denied 511 US 1137 [1994]).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Glover v. TransCor America, Inc.
See also Moses v. Diocese of Colo., 863 P.2d 310, 329 (Colo.1993) cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1137 , 114 S.Ct. 2153 , 128 L.Ed.2d 880 (1994) (Colorado law recognizes the tort of negligent supervision were an employer knew or should have known that an employee’s conduct would subject third parties to an unreasonable risk of harm).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Alabama
v.
Watkins
v.
Watkins
No. 93-1596.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 31, 1994.
Published
Ct. Crim. App. Ala. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.