Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 New York opinions name it 1 courts 1988–2017 0 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Arnoldgreen2 sentences2007“Where a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held, it is the proper remedy for [the] violation of [CPL] article 730” (People v Bey, 144 AD2d 972, 973 [1988]), but we are unable to determine on the record before us whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible (see People v Arnold, 113 AD2d 101, 107-108 [1985]). 2000We are unable to determine from this record whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held (see, People v Arnold, 113 AD2d 101, 107-108 ). | 2 | 4 |
People v. Blairgreen2 sentences2007“Where a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held, it is the proper remedy for [the] violation of [CPL] article 730” (People v Bey, 144 AD2d 972, 973 [1988]), but we are unable to determine on the record before us whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible (see People v Arnold, 113 AD2d 101, 107-108 [1985]). 2005“Where a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held, it is the proper remedy for violation of article 730” (People v Bey, 144 AD2d 972, 973 [1988]). | 2 | 4 |
People v. Vargasgreen2 sentences2017A reconstruction hearing generally is the proper remedy for the violation of CPL article 730, but “we are unable to determine on the record before us whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible” (People v Greene, 38 AD3d 1338, 1339 [2007], lv dismissed 11 NY3d 788 [2008]). 2017A reconstruction hearing generally is the proper remedy for the violation of CPL article 730, but “we are unable to determine on the record before us whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible” (People v Greene, 38 AD3d 1338, 1339 [2007], lv dismissed 11 NY3d 788 [2008]). | 2 | 3 |
People v. Armlingreen2 sentences1993We remit the matter for a hearing before a different Judge (see, People v Armlin, supra, at 173; People v Wright, 105 AD2d 1088 ). 1988Where a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held, it is the proper remedy for violation of article 730 (see, People v Armlin, 37 NY2d 167 ; People v Wright, 105 AD2d 1088 , on appeal following remand 124 AD2d 1015 , Iv denied 69 NY2d 751 ; People v Weech, supra). | 1 | 2 |
Washburn v. Citibank (South Dakota), N. A.green2 sentences2005Here, a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible inasmuch as contemporaneous psychiatric examinations were conducted in connection with an unrelated proceeding in Wyoming County, less than 2 Vs years have elapsed since the conclusion of the trial herein, and “those who observed defendant at trial, including the Trial Judge, can testify concerning their observations of defendant’s behavior and demeanor at or near the time of trial” (People v Gray, 190 AD2d 1057, 1057 [1993]; see People v Allen, 224 AD2d 1027 [1996]). 2005Here, a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible inasmuch as contemporaneous psychiatric examinations were conducted in connection with an unrelated proceeding in Wyoming County, less than 2 Vs years have elapsed since the conclusion of the trial herein, and “those who observed defendant at trial, including the Trial Judge, can testify concerning their observations of defendant’s behavior and demeanor at or near the time of trial” (People v Gray, 190 AD2d 1057, 1057 [1993]; see People v Allen, 224 AD2d 1027 [1996]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Phillipsgreen2 sentences2005Here, a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible inasmuch as contemporaneous psychiatric examinations were conducted in connection with an unrelated proceeding in Wyoming County, less than 2 Vs years have elapsed since the conclusion of the trial herein, and “those who observed defendant at trial, including the Trial Judge, can testify concerning their observations of defendant’s behavior and demeanor at or near the time of trial” (People v Gray, 190 AD2d 1057, 1057 [1993]; see People v Allen, 224 AD2d 1027 [1996]). 2005Here, a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible inasmuch as contemporaneous psychiatric examinations were conducted in connection with an unrelated proceeding in Wyoming County, less than 2 Vs years have elapsed since the conclusion of the trial herein, and “those who observed defendant at trial, including the Trial Judge, can testify concerning their observations of defendant’s behavior and demeanor at or near the time of trial” (People v Gray, 190 AD2d 1057, 1057 [1993]; see People v Allen, 224 AD2d 1027 [1996]). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Gonzalez
green
2 sentences2017A reconstruction hearing generally is the proper remedy for the violation of CPL article 730, but “we are unable to determine on the record before us whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible” (People v Greene, 38 AD3d 1338, 1339 [2007], lv dismissed 11 NY3d 788 [2008]). 2017A reconstruction hearing generally is the proper remedy for the violation of CPL article 730, but “we are unable to determine on the record before us whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible” (People v Greene, 38 AD3d 1338, 1339 [2007], lv dismissed 11 NY3d 788 [2008]). | 3 | 2017–2017 |
People v. Wright
green
2 sentences1988Where a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held, it is the proper remedy for violation of article 730 (see, People v Armlin, 37 NY2d 167 ; People v Wright, 105 AD2d 1088 , on appeal following remand 124 AD2d 1015 , Iv denied 69 NY2d 751 ; People v Weech, supra). 1988The key factors in determining whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held are the lapse of time since defendant’s trial and the availability of expert and lay witnesses who can testify about their observations of defendant’s behavior and demeanor at or near the time of trial (see, People v Arnold, 113 AD2d 101, 107 , on appeal following remand 126 AD2d 955 ; People v Wright, supra; People v Weech, supra; People v Lowe, supra). | 2 | 1988–1993 |
People v. Lowe
green
2 sentences1993We conclude that a meaningful reconstruction hearing is feasible, in light of the facts that a contemporaneous psychiatric examination was conducted, less than two years have elapsed since the trial, and those who observed defendant at trial, including the Trial Judge, can testify concerning their observations of defendant’s behavior and demeanor at or near the time of trial (see, People v Bey, 144 AD2d 972, 973 ; People v Arnold, 113 AD2d 101, 107-108 ; cf., People v Lowe, 109 AD2d 300, 304-305 , lv denied 67 NY2d 653 ). 1988The key factors in determining whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held are the lapse of time since defendant’s trial and the availability of expert and lay witnesses who can testify about their observations of defendant’s behavior and demeanor at or near the time of trial (see, People v Arnold, 113 AD2d 101, 107 , on appeal following remand 126 AD2d 955 ; People v Wright, supra; People v Weech, supra; People v Lowe, supra). | 2 | 1988–1993 |
People v. Mulholland
green
1 sentence2008In this case, however, the report of the one examination that was conducted is cursory and wholly conclusory, and the record fails to otherwise reveal that a meaningful reconstruction hearing could be conducted (cf. People v Mulholland, 129 AD2d at 859 ). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
People v. Graham
green
1 sentence1990We see no reason why a meaningful reconstruction hearing could not be held to determine defendant’s competency at the time of his guilty plea since his plea was entered less than one year ago (see, People v Bey, 144 AD2d 972, 973-974 ; People v Graham, 127 AD2d 443, 446 ). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
People v. Weech
neutral
2 sentences1988Where a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held, it is the proper remedy for violation of article 730 (see, People v Armlin, 37 NY2d 167 ; People v Wright, 105 AD2d 1088 , on appeal following remand 124 AD2d 1015 , Iv denied 69 NY2d 751 ; People v Weech, supra). 1988The key factors in determining whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held are the lapse of time since defendant’s trial and the availability of expert and lay witnesses who can testify about their observations of defendant’s behavior and demeanor at or near the time of trial (see, People v Arnold, 113 AD2d 101, 107 , on appeal following remand 126 AD2d 955 ; People v Wright, supra; People v Weech, supra; People v Lowe, supra). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
People v. Wright
neutral
1 sentence1988Where a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held, it is the proper remedy for violation of article 730 (see, People v Armlin, 37 NY2d 167 ; People v Wright, 105 AD2d 1088 , on appeal following remand 124 AD2d 1015 , Iv denied 69 NY2d 751 ; People v Weech, supra). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
People v. Arnold
neutral
2 sentences1988The key factors in determining whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held are the lapse of time since defendant’s trial and the availability of expert and lay witnesses who can testify about their observations of defendant’s behavior and demeanor at or near the time of trial (see, People v Arnold, 113 AD2d 101, 107 , on appeal following remand 126 AD2d 955 ; People v Wright, supra; People v Weech, supra; People v Lowe, supra). 1988The key factors in determining whether a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held are the lapse of time since defendant’s trial and the availability of expert and lay witnesses who can testify about their observations of defendant’s behavior and demeanor at or near the time of trial (see, People v Arnold, 113 AD2d 101, 107 , on appeal following remand 126 AD2d 955 ; People v Wright, supra; People v Weech, supra; People v Lowe, supra). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Long Island Savings Bank v. Savage
neutral
1 sentence1988Where a meaningful reconstruction hearing can be held, it is the proper remedy for violation of article 730 (see, People v Armlin, 37 NY2d 167 ; People v Wright, 105 AD2d 1088 , on appeal following remand 124 AD2d 1015 , Iv denied 69 NY2d 751 ; People v Weech, supra). | 1 | 1988–1988 |