67 New York opinions name it 9 courts 1916–2025 5 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. Bleakleygreen2 sentences2024Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime and the defense of justification in this nonjury trial ( see People v Danielson , 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant's contention in his main brief that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence ( see generally People v Bleakley , 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]; People v McKenzie , 207 AD3d 1070 , 1071 [4th Dept 2022], lv denied 39 NY3d 987 [2022]). 2024Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime and the defense of justification in this nonjury trial ( see People v Danielson , 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant's contention in his main brief that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence ( see generally People v Bleakley , 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]; People v McKenzie , 207 AD3d 1070 , 1071 [4th Dept 2022], lv denied 39 NY3d 987 [2022]). | 7 | 8 |
People v. Danielsongreen2 sentences2024Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime and the defense of justification in this nonjury trial ( see People v Danielson , 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant's contention in his main brief that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence ( see generally People v Bleakley , 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]; People v McKenzie , 207 AD3d 1070 , 1071 [4th Dept 2022], lv denied 39 NY3d 987 [2022]). 2024Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime and the defense of justification in this nonjury trial ( see People v Danielson , 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant's contention in his main brief that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence ( see generally People v Bleakley , 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]; People v McKenzie , 207 AD3d 1070 , 1071 [4th Dept 2022], lv denied 39 NY3d 987 [2022]). | 6 | 8 |
Di Nuzzo v. Gardnergreen2 sentences2016No. 22 of City of N.Y., 75 NY2d 997, 1000 [1990]; Matter of Hegarty v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 5 AD3d 771, 772-773 [2004]). 2016No. 22 of City of N.Y., 75 NY2d 997, 1000 [1990]; Matter of Hegarty v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 5 AD3d 771, 772-773 [2004]). | 3 | 3 |
People v. Smithgreen2 sentences2014Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime and the violation in this nonjury trial (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant’s further contention that the court failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded when it determined that he intended to cause serious physical injury (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]), and when it rejected his justification defense (see People v Moreno, 31 AD3d 1214, 1214 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 869 [2006]). 2014Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime and the violation in this nonjury trial (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant’s further contention that the court failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded when it determined that he intended to cause serious physical injury (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]), and when it rejected his justification defense (see People v Moreno, 31 AD3d 1214, 1214 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 869 [2006]). | 2 | 3 |
People v. McIntyregreen2 sentences2024We reject defendant's contentions in his main and pro se supplemental briefs that Supreme Court violated his right to self-representation ( see generally US Const 6th, 14th Amends; NY Const, art I, § 6; People v McIntyre , 36 NY2d 10, 14 [1974]). 2024We reject defendant's contentions in his main and pro se supplemental briefs that Supreme Court violated his right to self-representation ( see generally US Const 6th, 14th Amends; NY Const, art I, § 6; People v McIntyre , 36 NY2d 10, 14 [1974]). | 2 | 2 |
Hankins v. Board of Educationgreen2 sentences2016No. 22 of City of N.Y., 75 NY2d 997, 1000 [1990]; Matter of Hegarty v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 5 AD3d 771, 772-773 [2004]). 2016No. 22 of City of N.Y., 75 NY2d 997, 1000 [1990]; Matter of Hegarty v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 5 AD3d 771, 772-773 [2004]). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Morsegreen2 sentences2016As we have previously observed, those laws are meant to enhance sentences for defendants who refuse to reform after receiving a valid conviction for a crime and hearing the court pronounce sentence (see People v Morse, 62 NY2d 205, 222 [1984]). 2016As we have previously observed, those laws are meant to enhance sentences for defendants who refuse to reform after receiving a valid conviction for a crime and hearing the court pronounce sentence ( see People v Morse , 62 NY2d 205, 222 [1984]). | 2 | 2 |
People Ex Rel. Bennett v. Lamangreen2 sentences1969Bennett v. Laman (277 N. Y. 368, 376, 381, 384 ), the Court of Appeals of this State stated: “ That a court of equity will not undertake the enforcement of the criminal law, and will not enjoin the commission of a crime is a principle of equity jurisprudence that is settled beyond any question. 1966Bennett v. Laman ( 277 N. Y. 368 ) the court stated (p. 376): “ That a court of equity will not undertake the enforcement of the criminal law, and will not enjoin the commission of a crime in a principle of equity jurisprudence that is settled beyond any question. | 1 | 3 |
People v. Contrerasgreen1 sentence2022Defendant's testimony that, contrary to the account established by the People's witnesses, the victim arrived at defendant's Syracuse home while carrying a handgun and threatening to kill defendant and his family merely "presented a credibility issue for the [jury] to resolve" ( Perkins , 160 AD3d at 1456 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Alls , 195 AD2d 952, 953 [4th Dept 1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 890 [1993]), and the jury, "as the finder of fact, 'was entitled to discredit the testimony of defendant' that the victim was the initial aggressor" ( People v Contreras , 154 AD3d 132 | 1 | 1 |
People v. Allsgreen1 sentence2022Defendant's testimony that, contrary to the account established by the People's witnesses, the victim arrived at defendant's Syracuse home while carrying a handgun and threatening to kill defendant and his family merely "presented a credibility issue for the [jury] to resolve" ( Perkins , 160 AD3d at 1456 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Alls , 195 AD2d 952, 953 [4th Dept 1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 890 [1993]), and the jury, "as the finder of fact, 'was entitled to discredit the testimony of defendant' that the victim was the initial aggressor" ( People v Contreras , 154 AD3d 132 | 1 | 1 |
People v. Ferrergreen1 sentence2022Defendant's testimony that, contrary to the account established by the People's witnesses, the victim arrived at defendant's Syracuse home while carrying a handgun and threatening to kill defendant and his family merely "presented a credibility issue for the [jury] to resolve" ( Perkins , 160 AD3d at 1456 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Alls , 195 AD2d 952, 953 [4th Dept 1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 890 [1993]), and the jury, "as the finder of fact, 'was entitled to discredit the testimony of defendant' that the victim was the initial aggressor" ( People v Contreras , 154 AD3d 132 | 1 | 1 |
People v. Wrightgreen1 sentence2020Given the proof that the victim suffered a collapsed lung, the jury reasonably found that he sustained a serious physical injury within the meaning of Penal Law § 10.00 (10) ( see People v Wright , 105 AD2d 1088, 1088-1089 [4th Dept 1984]; see also People v Barbuto , 126 AD3d 1501 , 1502 [4th Dept 2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 1159 [2015]; People v Thompson , 224 AD2d 646 , 647 [2d Dept 1996], lv denied 88 NY2d 970 [1996]). | 1 | 1 |
TUDISCO, THOMAS J. v. MINCER, DAWNMARIEgreen1 sentence2020Given the proof that the victim suffered a collapsed lung, the jury reasonably found that he sustained a serious physical injury within the meaning of Penal Law § 10.00 (10) ( see People v Wright , 105 AD2d 1088, 1088-1089 [4th Dept 1984]; see also People v Barbuto , 126 AD3d 1501 , 1502 [4th Dept 2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 1159 [2015]; People v Thompson , 224 AD2d 646 , 647 [2d Dept 1996], lv denied 88 NY2d 970 [1996]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Kinneygreen1 sentence2017The purpose of CPL 200.60 is to provide a defendant with the opportunity to stipulate to prior convictions or conviction-related facts that constitute an element of the crime charged in order to “avoid the prejudicial impact of having the prior offense proven to the jury” (People v Kinney, 66 AD3d 1238, 1239 [2009] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see People v Cooper, 78 NY2d 476, 480-483 [1991]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Coopergreen1 sentence2017The purpose of CPL 200.60 is to provide a defendant with the opportunity to stipulate to prior convictions or conviction-related facts that constitute an element of the crime charged in order to “avoid the prejudicial impact of having the prior offense proven to the jury” (People v Kinney, 66 AD3d 1238, 1239 [2009] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see People v Cooper, 78 NY2d 476, 480-483 [1991]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Langgreen1 sentence2016Defendant’s challenge to the voluntariness of his plea, his assertion that the plea colloquy negated an essential element of the crime and his challenge to the severity of the sentence imposed all should have been raised on a direct appeal and are not the proper subjects of a CPL 440.10 motion (see CPL 440.10 [2] [c]; People v Lang, 127 AD3d 1253, 1255 [2015]; People v Morin, 117 AD3d 1315 , 1317 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 1220 [2015]; People v Vallee, 97 AD3d 972 , 974 [2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 1104 [2013]). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Colemangreen1 sentence2013The Ex Post Facto Clause prohibits Congress and the States from enacting any law that (1) retroactively imposes a punishment for an act that was not punishable when it was committed; (2) retroactively increases the punishment for a crime after its commission; or (3) deprives one charged with a crime of a defense that was available at the time the crime was committed (United States v Coleman, 675 F3d 615, 619 [6th Cir 2012]). | 1 | 1 |
Arthur Cutshall, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Don Sundquist, Govenor of the State of Tennessee, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appelleegreen1 sentence2013The Ex Post Facto Clause is only implicated by criminal statutes or acts intended to punish (see Cutshall v Sundquist, 193 F3d 466, 477 [6th Cir 1999]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Youmansgreen1 sentence2006It was not necessary that defendant independently recite the facts underlying the crime to which he pleaded guilty and his affirmative response to County Court’s description of the crime and inquiry as to whether defendant committed it did not cast doubt on his guilt or the voluntariness of his plea (see People v Mahar, 12 AD3d 715, 716 [2004]; People v Snare, 11 AD3d 823, 824 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 748 [2004]). | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Mahargreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Hicksgreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Samuelgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Selkowitz v. County of Nassaugreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. McGrathgreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Maerlinggreen | 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. Howard
green
2 sentences2014“It is well settled that credibility determinations by the court . . . are entitled to great deference . . . , and minor inconsistencies in the testimony of certain prosecution witnesses do not render their testimony incredible as a matter of law” (People v Howard, 101 AD3d 1749 , 1750 [2012], lv denied 21 NY3d 944 [2013] [internal quotation marks omitted]). 2014“It is well settled that credibility determinations by the court . . . are entitled to great deference . . . , and minor inconsistencies in the testimony of certain prosecution witnesses do not render their testimony incredible as a matter of law” (People v Howard, 101 AD3d 1749 , 1750 [2012], lv denied 21 NY3d 944 [2013] [internal quotation marks omitted]). | 3 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Fields
neutral
2 sentences2013Defendant was convicted of endangering the welfare of a child, a crime to which the defense of justification generally does not apply (see People v Varela, 164 AD2d 924 [2d Dept 1990], lv denied 76 NY2d 1025 [1990]; People v Fields, 134 AD2d 365 [2d Dept 1987], lv denied 72 NY2d 956 [1988]). 2013Defendant was convicted of endangering the welfare of a child, a crime to which the defense of justification generally does not apply (see People v Varela, 164 AD2d 924 [2d Dept 1990], lv denied 76 NY2d 1025 [1990]; People v Fields, 134 AD2d 365 [2d Dept 1987], lv denied 72 NY2d 956 [1988]). | 2 | 2013–2013 |
People v. Varela
neutral
2 sentences2013Defendant was convicted of endangering the welfare of a child, a crime to which the defense of justification generally does not apply (see People v Varela, 164 AD2d 924 [2d Dept 1990], lv denied 76 NY2d 1025 [1990]; People v Fields, 134 AD2d 365 [2d Dept 1987], lv denied 72 NY2d 956 [1988]). 2013Defendant was convicted of endangering the welfare of a child, a crime to which the defense of justification generally does not apply (see People v Varela, 164 AD2d 924 [2d Dept 1990], lv denied 76 NY2d 1025 [1990]; People v Fields, 134 AD2d 365 [2d Dept 1987], lv denied 72 NY2d 956 [1988]). | 2 | 2013–2013 |
People v. . Molineux
green
2 sentences2000This is an application by the People, pursuant to People v Ventimiglia ( 52 NY2d 350 ) and People v Molineux ( 168 NY 264 ), for permission to present testimony that the defendant, who is charged with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol in violation of section 1192 (3) of the Vehicle and Traffic Law, had been previously convicted of the same crime in violation of subdivision (2). 1969(See, e.g., People v. Dales, supra, p. 101 ; People v. Molineux, supra, pp. 297-299 ; People v. Peckens, supra; Mayer v. People, supra.) In such cases it is recognized that “ proof of intent is often unobtainable except by evidence of successive repetitions of the act.” (People v. Molineux, supra, p. 298 .) Analytically, the problem is one of the similarity of the other misconduct with the crime charged. | 2 | 1969–2000 |
People v. Morgan-Smith
green
1 sentence2025To the extent that there was a variation between the locations, i.e., Town and Village, "the date, approximate time and place of the crime in the waiver of indictment constitute[ ] non-elemental factual information" ( People v Morgan-Smith , 182 AD3d 923 , 924 [3d Dept 2020], lv denied 35 NY3d 1047 [2020]; see People v Lang , 34 NY3d 545 , 568-570 [2019]). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
People v. Senor
green
1 sentence2020Given the proof that the victim suffered a collapsed lung, the jury reasonably found that he sustained a serious physical injury within the meaning of Penal Law § 10.00 (10) ( see People v Wright , 105 AD2d 1088, 1088-1089 [4th Dept 1984]; see also People v Barbuto , 126 AD3d 1501 , 1502 [4th Dept 2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 1159 [2015]; People v Thompson , 224 AD2d 646 , 647 [2d Dept 1996], lv denied 88 NY2d 970 [1996]). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Vega v. Selsky
green
1 sentence2017Further, because our conclusion results in the suppression of all evidence in support of the crime and violation charged, the indictment must be dismissed (see id. at 1425 ). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
People v. Vallee
green
1 sentence2016Defendant’s challenge to the voluntariness of his plea, his assertion that the plea colloquy negated an essential element of the crime and his challenge to the severity of the sentence imposed all should have been raised on a direct appeal and are not the proper subjects of a CPL 440.10 motion (see CPL 440.10 [2] [c]; People v Lang, 127 AD3d 1253, 1255 [2015]; People v Morin, 117 AD3d 1315 , 1317 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 1220 [2015]; People v Vallee, 97 AD3d 972 , 974 [2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 1104 [2013]). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
People v. Morin
green
1 sentence2016Defendant’s challenge to the voluntariness of his plea, his assertion that the plea colloquy negated an essential element of the crime and his challenge to the severity of the sentence imposed all should have been raised on a direct appeal and are not the proper subjects of a CPL 440.10 motion (see CPL 440.10 [2] [c]; People v Lang, 127 AD3d 1253, 1255 [2015]; People v Morin, 117 AD3d 1315 , 1317 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 1220 [2015]; People v Vallee, 97 AD3d 972 , 974 [2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 1104 [2013]). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
In re Weinig
neutral
1 sentence2012Acceptance of respondent’s resignation now will expeditiously remove respondent from the roll of attorneys and dispense with the need for undertaking the protracted process that a serious crime hearing would entail, and, as in Matter of Flores ( 47 AD3d 335 [2007], supra) and Matter of Weinig ( 220 AD2d 184 [1996], supra), is the better procedure here. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
In re Flores
green
1 sentence2012Acceptance of respondent’s resignation now will expeditiously remove respondent from the roll of attorneys and dispense with the need for undertaking the protracted process that a serious crime hearing would entail, and, as in Matter of Flores ( 47 AD3d 335 [2007], supra) and Matter of Weinig ( 220 AD2d 184 [1996], supra), is the better procedure here. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| People v. Stewart green | 1 | 2006–2006 |
| Matter of Delany green | 1 | 2004–2004 |
| Levi v. Smith green | 1 | 2004–2004 |
| In re Agulnick neutral | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| People v. Ventimiglia green | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| People v. Edmonds green | 1 | 1999–1999 |
| People v. Johnson neutral | 1 | 1999–1999 |
| People v. Ortiz green | 1 | 1999–1999 |
| Brady v. Maryland green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| De Long v. County of Erie green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| McDonald v. Massachusetts green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
| Collins v. Youngblood green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
| Gryger v. Burke green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
| In re Leeds neutral | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| In re Werlin green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| In re Giampa green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| People v. Satiro green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| People v. Ingram green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| People v. Cain green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| People v. Owens green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| People v. Drain green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| People v. Cassidy green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| People v. Smith green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Brascomb v. State green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| People v. La Sorsa green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| People v. Bermudez neutral | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| People v. Morris green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| People v. Davis green | 1 | 1985–1985 |
| People v. Ivisic green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.
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.