Almendarez-Torres exception in New York

15 New York opinions name it 7 courts 2004–2026 13 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (10)

Case	Followed	Cited
Erlinger v. United Statesgreen scotus · 2024 · cited in 5 New York opinions naming this issue, 2024–2026 2 sentences 2026Under the Almendarez-Torres rule, a judge was allowed "to undertake the job of finding the fact of a prior conviction—and that job alone" ( Erlinger , 602 US at 837 [citation omitted]). 2026Under the Almendarez-Torres rule, a judge was allowed "to undertake the job of finding the fact of a prior conviction—and that job alone" ( Erlinger , 602 US at 837 [citation omitted]).	4	5
Apprendi v. New Jerseygreen scotus · 2000 · cited in 6 New York opinions naming this issue, 2010–2025 2 sentences 2025Since the Supreme Court's decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 US 466 (2000) — which did not disturb Almendarez-Torres' exception permitting a judicial determination of a prior conviction for the purpose of imposing an increased sentence - New York appellate courts have entertained numerous constitutional challenges to the persistent felony offender statutes. 2025Since the Supreme Court's decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 US 466 (2000) — which did not disturb Almendarez-Torres' exception permitting a judicial determination of a prior conviction for the purpose of imposing an increased sentence - New York appellate courts have entertained numerous constitutional challenges to the persistent felony offender statutes.	3	6
Almendarez-Torres v. United Statesred scotus · 1998 · cited in 3 New York opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025 2 sentences 2025See 523 U.S. 224, 247 , 118 S.Ct. 1219 , 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). 2025See 523 U.S. 224, 247 , 118 S.Ct. 1219 , 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998).	3	3
People v. Riveragreen nysupctnewyork · 2024 · cited in 3 New York opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025 2 sentences 2025As such they are possessed of substantial trustworthiness, emanating as they do from official court and correctional records. [6]More importantly, their establishment involves no exercise of discretionary judgement by the court, and relate neither to the manner and circumstances of the commission of the crime, nor to the character and background of the defendant."); see also, People v Rivera , 221 NYS3d 894 , 2024 NY Slip Op 24278 (Sup Ct, NY Cty, October 28, 2024).] The facts necessary to determine tolling under the New York State persistent violent felony sentencing scheme continue to fall 2025As such they are possessed of substantial trustworthiness, emanating as they do from official court and correctional records. [6]More importantly, their establishment involves no exercise of discretionary judgement by the court, and relate neither to the manner and circumstances of the commission of the crime, nor to the character and background of the defendant."); see also, People v Rivera , 221 NYS3d 894 , 2024 NY Slip Op 24278 (Sup Ct, NY Cty, October 28, 2024).] The facts necessary to determine tolling under the New York State persistent violent felony sentencing scheme continue to fall	3	3
Ring v. Arizonagreen scotus · 2002 · cited in 3 New York opinions naming this issue, 2004–2024 2 sentences 2024See , Ring v. Arizona , 536 U.S. 584 , (2002) (striking down an Arizona statute under which, following a first degree murder conviction "the trial judge, sitting alone, determines the presence or absence of the aggravating factors required by Arizona law for imposition of the death penalty); Blakely v. Washington , 524 U.S. 296 (2004) (striking down a Washington state law which authorized enhanced sentencing where the court found that the defendant acted with "deliberate cruelty); United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220, 244 (2005) (holding that Apprendi applied to the mandatory nature of the F 2024See , Ring v. Arizona , 536 U.S. 584 , (2002) (striking down an Arizona statute under which, following a first degree murder conviction "the trial judge, sitting alone, determines the presence or absence of the aggravating factors required by Arizona law for imposition of the death penalty); Blakely v. Washington , 524 U.S. 296 (2004) (striking down a Washington state law which authorized enhanced sentencing where the court found that the defendant acted with "deliberate cruelty); United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220, 244 (2005) (holding that Apprendi applied to the mandatory nature of the F	2	3
United States v. Bookergreen scotus · 2004 · cited in 2 New York opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024 2 sentences 2024See , Ring v. Arizona , 536 U.S. 584 , (2002) (striking down an Arizona statute under which, following a first degree murder conviction "the trial judge, sitting alone, determines the presence or absence of the aggravating factors required by Arizona law for imposition of the death penalty); Blakely v. Washington , 524 U.S. 296 (2004) (striking down a Washington state law which authorized enhanced sentencing where the court found that the defendant acted with "deliberate cruelty); United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220, 244 (2005) (holding that Apprendi applied to the mandatory nature of the F 2024See , Ring v. Arizona , 536 U.S. 584 , (2002) (striking down an Arizona statute under which, following a first degree murder conviction "the trial judge, sitting alone, determines the presence or absence of the aggravating factors required by Arizona law for imposition of the death penalty); Blakely v. Washington , 524 U.S. 296 (2004) (striking down a Washington state law which authorized enhanced sentencing where the court found that the defendant acted with "deliberate cruelty); United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220, 244 (2005) (holding that Apprendi applied to the mandatory nature of the F	2	2
People v. Bellgreen ny · 2010 · cited in 4 New York opinions naming this issue, 2024–2025 2 sentences 2025See, People v Leon, 10 NY3d 122, 126 (2008) (denying Apprendi challenge; finding that the "who, what, when and where" of a prior conviction were so basic as to be "implicit" and wholly within the ability of a sentencing judge); People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935, 936 (2010) (denying Almendarez-Torres challenge). 2025See, People v Leon, 10 NY3d 122, 126 (2008) (denying Apprendi challenge; finding that the "who, what, when and where" of a prior conviction were so basic as to be "implicit" and wholly within the ability of a sentencing judge); People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935, 936 (2010) (denying Almendarez-Torres challenge).	1	4
People v. Leongreen ny · 2008 · cited in 3 New York opinions naming this issue, 2024–2025 2 sentences 2025See, People v Leon, 10 NY3d 122, 126 (2008) (denying Apprendi challenge; finding that the "who, what, when and where" of a prior conviction were so basic as to be "implicit" and wholly within the ability of a sentencing judge); People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935, 936 (2010) (denying Almendarez-Torres challenge). 2025See, People v Leon, 10 NY3d 122, 126 (2008) (denying Apprendi challenge; finding that the "who, what, when and where" of a prior conviction were so basic as to be "implicit" and wholly within the ability of a sentencing judge); People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935, 936 (2010) (denying Almendarez-Torres challenge).	1	3
People v. Jacksongreen nysupctqueens · 2025 · cited in 2 New York opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025 2 sentences 2025People v Jackson, 2025 NY Slip Op 25010 6 (Sup Ct, Queens County 2025) (holding that Erlinger does not require a jury trial to determine dates of incarceration or release related to prior convictions, concluding that "[t]he facts necessary to determine tolling under the New York State persistent violent felony sentencing scheme continue to fall within the Almendarez-Torres exception to Apprendi ). 2025People v Jackson, 2025 NY Slip Op 25010 6 (Sup Ct, Queens County 2025) (holding that Erlinger does not require a jury trial to determine dates of incarceration or release related to prior convictions, concluding that "[t]he facts necessary to determine tolling under the New York State persistent violent felony sentencing scheme continue to fall within the Almendarez-Torres exception to Apprendi ).	1	2
People v. Vickersgreen nysupctbrnx · 2025 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025 2 sentences 2025See also , People v Vickers, 2025 NY Slip Op 25157 (Sup Ct, Bronx County 2025) ; People v Berry , 86 Misc 3d 1203(A) (Sup Ct, Queens County 2025); People v Lawton , 86 Misc 3d 1210(A) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2025); People v Rivera , 85 Misc 3d 1032 (Sup Ct, NY County 2024); People v McKinley, 85 Misc 3d 467, 471 (Sup Ct, NY County 2024). 2025See also , People v Vickers, 2025 NY Slip Op 25157 (Sup Ct, Bronx County 2025) ; People v Berry , 86 Misc 3d 1203(A) (Sup Ct, Queens County 2025); People v Lawton , 86 Misc 3d 1210(A) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2025); People v Rivera , 85 Misc 3d 1032 (Sup Ct, NY County 2024); People v McKinley, 85 Misc 3d 467, 471 (Sup Ct, NY County 2024).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (1)

Case	Negative	Cited
Dretke v. Haleygreen scotus · 2004 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024 2 sentences 2024But see Dretke v. Haley , 541 U.S. 386, 395-96 (2004) (characterizing the question of whether the Almendarez-Torres exception extends to a finding that the convictions were obtained sequentially as a "difficult constitutional challenge[ ]"). 2024But see Dretke v. Haley , 541 U.S. 386, 395-96 (2004) (characterizing the question of whether the Almendarez-Torres exception extends to a finding that the convictions were obtained sequentially as a "difficult constitutional challenge[ ]").	1	1

Also cited on this issue (13)

Case	Cited	Years
People v. Miles green nysupct · 2004 2 sentences 2025The interpretation the Defendant wishes this Court to adopt has never been articulated by the New York Court of Appeals in its post- Apprendi analysis, nor has the U.S. Supreme Court ever addressed this specific factual circumstance to the contrary in its post- Apprendi caselaw (while, again, continuing to acknowledge the existence of the Almendarez-Torres exception in Erlinger ). [For an interesting analysis of this issue that this Court finds persuasive, see People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271, 283 , 783 NYS2d 748 (NY Sup Ct, 2004), affd 49 AD3d 446 , 853 NYS2d 548 (2008), lv denied 10 NY3d 867 , 2025The interpretation the Defendant wishes this Court to adopt has never been articulated by the New York Court of Appeals in its post- Apprendi analysis, nor has the U.S. Supreme Court ever addressed this specific factual circumstance to the contrary in its post- Apprendi caselaw (while, again, continuing to acknowledge the existence of the Almendarez-Torres exception in Erlinger ). [For an interesting analysis of this issue that this Court finds persuasive, see People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271, 283 , 783 NYS2d 748 (NY Sup Ct, 2004), affd 49 AD3d 446 , 853 NYS2d 548 (2008), lv denied 10 NY3d 867 ,	6	2024–2025
In re Rasaad DeF. green nyappdiv · 2008 2 sentences 2025The interpretation the Defendant wishes this Court to adopt has never been articulated by the New York Court of Appeals in its post- Apprendi analysis, nor has the U.S. Supreme Court ever addressed this specific factual circumstance to the contrary in its post- Apprendi caselaw (while, again, continuing to acknowledge the existence of the Almendarez-Torres exception in Erlinger ). [For an interesting analysis of this issue that this Court finds persuasive, see People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271, 283 , 783 NYS2d 748 (NY Sup Ct, 2004), affd 49 AD3d 446 , 853 NYS2d 548 (2008), lv denied 10 NY3d 867 , 2025The interpretation the Defendant wishes this Court to adopt has never been articulated by the New York Court of Appeals in its post- Apprendi analysis, nor has the U.S. Supreme Court ever addressed this specific factual circumstance to the contrary in its post- Apprendi caselaw (while, again, continuing to acknowledge the existence of the Almendarez-Torres exception in Erlinger ). [For an interesting analysis of this issue that this Court finds persuasive, see People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271, 283 , 783 NYS2d 748 (NY Sup Ct, 2004), affd 49 AD3d 446 , 853 NYS2d 548 (2008), lv denied 10 NY3d 867 ,	6	2024–2025
The People v. Michael E. Prindle green ny · 2017 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024
Harari v. Davis green nyappdiv · 2009 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024
People v. Quinones green ny · 2009 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024
People v. Rivera green ny · 2005 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024
People v. Rosen green ny · 2001 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024
People v. Sweeper green ny · 2010 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024
In re the Estate of Chabrier green nyappdiv · 2001 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024
People v. Wilkonson green nyappdiv · 2001 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024
People v. Frazier green ny · 2010 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024
People v. Ray neutral nyappdiv · 2001 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024
People v. Feliciano green nyappdiv · 2001 2 sentences 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept 2024People v Rosen , 96 NY2d 329 [2001]; People v Rivera , 5 NY3d 61 [2005]; People v Quinones , 12 NY3d 116 [2009]; People v Sweeper , 15 NY3d 925 [2010]; People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935 [2010]; People v Frazier , 16 NY3d 36 [2010]; People v Prindle , 29 NY3d 463 [2017]; People v Grivas , 281 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Wilkonson , 281 AD2d 373 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Melendez , 282 AD2d 409 [1st Dept 2001]; [5]People v Feliciano , 285 AD2d 371 [1st Dept 2001]; People v Mendoza , 59 AD3d 182 [1st Dept 2009]; People v Miles , 5 Misc 3d 271 [Sup Ct, NY County 2004], affd 49 AD3d 446 [1st Dept	3	2024–2024

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NY § N.Y. Penal Law § 70.04 (8) NY § N.Y. Penal Law § 70.06 (5) NY § N.Y. Penal Law § 70.08 (4) USC § 18u.s.c.924 (4) USC § 8u.s.c.1326 (4) NY § N.Y. Penal Law § 70.70 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CA 23 (2003–2026) NY 15 (2004–2026) KS 7 (2005–2025) NJ 5 (1999–2026) WA 5 (2006–2025) AL 4 (2003–2004) IL 4 (2001–2008) PA 3 (2015–2019) ND 2 (2007–2016) AZ 2 (2002–2014)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check