People v. Hesterbay, 912 N.E.2d 1078 (NY 2009). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Hesterbay, 912 N.E.2d 1078 (NY 2009). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
93 citation events (93 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: People v. Schumaker (nyappdiv, 2016-02-11) · Strongest negative: People v. Barbuto (nyappdiv, 2015-03-27)
Treatment trajectory · 2009 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2009 2017 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" People v. Barbuto
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: but see · confidence high
Defendant thus failed to establish “ ‘the absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations’ for [defense] counsel’s” failure to move for severance (People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]; see People v Reid, 71 AD3d 699, 700 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 756 [2010]; People v Shell, 152 AD2d 609, 610 [1989], lv denied 74 NY2d 899 [1989]; but see People v Jeannot, 59 AD3d 737, 737 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 916 [2009]).
discussed Cited "but see" People v. Barbuto
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: but see · confidence high
Defendant thus failed to establish “ ‘the absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations’ for [defense] counsel’s” failure to move for severance (People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]; see People v Reid, 71 AD3d 699, 700 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 756 [2010]; People v Shell, 152 AD2d 609, 610 [1989], lv denied 74 NY2d 899 [1989]; but see People v Jeannot, 59 AD3d 737, 737 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 916 [2009]).
discussed Cited "but see" BARBUTO, JOEL S., PEOPLE v
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: but see · confidence high
Defendant thus failed to establish “ ‘the absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations’ for [defense] counsel’s” failure to move for severance (People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712 ; see People v Reid, 71 AD3d 699, 700 , lv denied 15 NY3d 756 ; People v Shell, 152 AD2d 609, 610 , lv denied 74 NY2d 899 ; but see People v Jeannot, 59 AD3d 737, 737 , lv denied 12 NY3d 916 ).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Schumaker
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
Here, “[w]e conclude that proof of the objective element [of the defense] is lacking . . . , inasmuch as defendant’s behavior immediately before and after the killing was inconsistent with the loss of control associated with the affirmative defense” (People v Mohamud, 115 AD3d 1227, 1228 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 965 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Jarvis, 60 AD3d 1478, 1479 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 916 [2009]).
discussed Cited "see" SCHUMAKER, DYLAN, PEOPLE v
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
Here, “[w]e conclude that proof of the objective element [of the defense] is lacking . . . , inasmuch as defendant’s behavior immediately before and after the killing was inconsistent with the loss of control associated with the affirmative defense” (People v Mohamud, 115 AD3d 1227, 1228 , lv denied 23 NY3d 965 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Jarvis, 60 AD3d 1478, 1479 , lv denied 12 NY3d 916 ).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Schumaker
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
Here, “[w]e conclude that proof of the objective element [of the defense] is lacking . . . , inasmuch as defendant’s behavior immediately before and after the killing was inconsistent with the loss of control associated with the affirmative defense” (People v Mohamud, 115 AD3d 1227, 1228 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 965 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Jarvis, 60 AD3d 1478, 1479 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 916 [2009]).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Hughes
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
Defendant failed to establish that the prosecutor’s alleged misconduct “caused such substantial prejudice to [him] that he has been denied due process of law” (People v Mott, 94 AD2d 415, 419 [1983]; see People v Jacobson, 60 AD3d 1326, 1328 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 916 [2009]).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Hughes
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
Defendant failed to establish that the prosecutor’s alleged misconduct “caused such substantial prejudice to [him] that he has been denied due process of law” (People v Mott, 94 AD2d 415, 419 [1983]; see People v Jacobson, 60 AD3d 1326, 1328 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 916 [2009]).
discussed Cited "see" HUGHES, EARNEST, PEOPLE v
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
Defendant failed to establish that the prosecutor’s alleged misconduct “caused such substantial prejudice to [him] that he has been denied due process of law” (People v Mott, 94 AD2d 415, 419 ; see People v Jacobson, 60 AD3d 1326, 1328 , lv denied 12 NY3d 916 ).
discussed Cited "see" JARVIS, KHARYE, PEOPLE v
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
Defense counsel’s error in failing to object to the testimony of the prosecution witness “simply cannot be construed as a misguided though reasonably plausible strategy decision” (id. at 1564; see People v Jeannot, 59 AD3d 737, 737 , lv denied 12 NY3d 916 ; People v Ofunniyin, 114 AD2d 1045, 1046-1047 ), and “ ‘is sufficiently serious to have deprived defendant of a fair trial’ ” (Webb, 90 AD3d at 1564 ).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Jarvis
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
Defense counsel’s error in failing to object to the testimony of the prosecution witness “simply cannot be construed as a misguided though reasonably plausible strategy decision” (id. at 1564; see People v Jeannot, 59 AD3d 737, 737 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 916 [2009]; People v Ofunniyin, 114 AD2d 1045, 1046-1047 [1985]), and “ ‘is sufficiently serious to have deprived defendant of a fair trial’ ” (Webb, 90 AD3d at 1564 ).
discussed Cited "see" PETERKIN, DON, PEOPLE v
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
Contrary to defendant’s further contention, “[i]t is well settled that where a person in police custody has been issued Miranda warnings and voluntarily and intelligently waives [his or her Miranda] rights, it is not necessary to repeat the warnings prior to subsequent questioning within a reasonable time thereafter, so long as the custody has remained continuous” (People v Glinsman, 107 AD2d 710, 710 , lv denied 64 NY2d 889 , cert denied 472 US 1021 ; see People v Jacobson, 60 AD3d 1326, 1327 , lv denied 12 NY3d 916 ).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Peterkin
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
Contrary to defendant’s further contention, “[i]t is well settled that where a person in police custody has been issued Miranda warnings and voluntarily and intelligently waives [his or her Miranda] rights, it is not necessary to repeat the warnings prior to subsequent questioning within a reasonable time thereafter, so long as the custody has remained continuous” (People v Glinsman, 107 AD2d 710, 710 [1985], lv denied 64 NY2d 889 [1985], cert denied 472 US 1021 [1985]; see People v Jacobson, 60 AD3d 1326, 1327 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 916 [2009]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
PEOPLE
v.
HESTERBAY.
New York Court of Appeals.
Jun 30, 2009.
912 N.E.2d 1078
Published

Application in criminal case for leave to appeal denied. (Ciparick, J.).