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.
62 New York opinions name it 6 courts 1989–2025 9 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. Mahboubiangreen2 sentences2025We have employed a two-part test, requiring severance [*2]"where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer defendant's guilt" (74 NY2d at 184). 2025We have employed a two-part test, requiring severance [*2]"where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer defendant's guilt" (74 NY2d at 184). | 19 | 52 |
People v. Cardwellgreen2 sentences2025"Severance is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant's guilt" ( People v Martins , 306 AD2d 423, 423 ; see People v Cardwell , 78 NY2d 996, 997-998 ). 2025"Severance is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant's guilt" ( People v Martins , 306 AD2d 423, 423; see People v Cardwell , 78 NY2d 996, 997-998). | 11 | 19 |
People v. Bornholdtgreen2 sentences2024Good cause under CPL § 200.40 (1) includes "a finding that a defendant or the people will be unduly prejudiced by a joint trial" ( see CPL § 200.40 [1]; see also People v Bornholdt , 33 NY2d 75, 86-87 [1973] ["Where proof against the defendants is supplied by the same evidence, only the most cogent reasons warrant a severance"]; People v Mahboubian , 74 NY2d 174, 183 [*2][1989]["Severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that the conflict alone wou 2024Good cause under CPL § 200.40 (1) includes "a finding that a defendant or the people will be unduly prejudiced by a joint trial" ( see CPL § 200.40 [1]; see also People v Bornholdt , 33 NY2d 75, 86-87 [1973] ["Where proof against the defendants is supplied by the same evidence, only the most cogent reasons warrant a severance"]; People v Mahboubian , 74 NY2d 174, 183 [*2][1989]["Severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that the conflict alone wou | 5 | 9 |
People v. Martinsgreen2 sentences2025"Severance is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant's guilt" ( People v Martins , 306 AD2d 423, 423 ; see People v Cardwell , 78 NY2d 996, 997-998 ). 2025"Severance is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant's guilt" ( People v Martins , 306 AD2d 423, 423; see People v Cardwell , 78 NY2d 996, 997-998). | 3 | 5 |
People v. Boylangreen2 sentences2023In People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d 174, 183 .-184 [1989], the Court of Appeals, while recognizing that "[s]ome degree of prejudice is of course inherent in every joint trial," provided that "severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in 1rreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that 15 [* 15] the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer defendant's guilt" (see People v Cardwell, 78 NY2d 996, 997-998 [1991]; People v Perry, 194 AD3d 849 , 850 [2d Dept 2021], Iv. denied 3iNY3d 1098 [2021]; Peop 2023Thus, "[s]everance is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant's guilt" ( People v Boylan , 193 AD3d at 965 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Warren , 20 NY3d 393, 397 ). | 2 | 3 |
People v. Chestnutgreen2 sentences2024Good cause under CPL § 200.40 (1) includes "a finding that a defendant or the people will be unduly prejudiced by a joint trial" ( see CPL § 200.40 [1]; see also People v Bornholdt , 33 NY2d 75, 86-87 [1973] ["Where proof against the defendants is supplied by the same evidence, only the most cogent reasons warrant a severance"]; People v Mahboubian , 74 NY2d 174, 183 [*2][1989]["Severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that the conflict alone wou 2024Good cause under CPL § 200.40 (1) includes "a finding that a defendant or the people will be unduly prejudiced by a joint trial" ( see CPL § 200.40 [1]; see also People v Bornholdt , 33 NY2d 75, 86-87 [1973] ["Where proof against the defendants is supplied by the same evidence, only the most cogent reasons warrant a severance"]; People v Mahboubian , 74 NY2d 174, 183 [*2][1989]["Severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that the conflict alone wou | 2 | 2 |
People v. Danielsongreen2 sentences2023We reject defendant's claim that the verdicts convicting him of drug possession and paraphernalia crimes were against the weight of the evidence ( People v Danielson , 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]). 2023We reject defendant's claim that the verdicts convicting him of drug possession and paraphernalia crimes were against the weight of the evidence ( People v Danielson , 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Warrengreen2 sentences2023Thus, "[s]everance is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant's guilt" ( People v Boylan , 193 AD3d at 965 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Warren , 20 NY3d 393, 397 ). 2020A trial before dual juries, which constitutes a modified form of severance, is to be used sparingly and is evaluated under standards for reviewing severance motions generally, as set forth above ( People v Warren , 20 NY3d 393, 397 [2013]). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Chisholmgreen2 sentences2004Severance is not required solely because of hostilities among the defendants, differences in their trial strategies, or inconsistencies in their defenses, and is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant’s guilt” (People v Johnson, 296 AD2d 422 [2002] [internal quotation marks omitted]; People v Echevarria, 282 AD2d 470, 471 [2001]; People v Apolinar, 208 AD2d 548, 549 [1994]). 2002“It is well settled that severance motions are addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court * * * Severance is not required solely because of hostilities among the defendants, differences in their trial strategies, or inconsistencies in their defenses, and is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant’s guilt” (People v Echevarria, 282 AD2d 470, 471 [internal quotation marks omitted]). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Cruzgreen2 sentences2008(Bruton v United States, 391 US 123, 135-136 [1968].) Our Court of Appeals in People v Cruz ( 66 NY2d 61, 73 [1985] ) 2 recognized that “severance is not required solely because of hostility between the defendants, differences in their trial strategies or inconsistencies in their defenses”; however, severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed that the conflict alone would lead a jury to infer defendants’ guilt. 1992Severance is not required solely because of hostilities between the defendants, differences in their trial strategies, or inconsistencies in their defenses, and is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant’s guilt (People v Mahboubian, supra, at 183 ; People v Cruz, 66 NY2d 61, 73 , revd on other grounds 481 US 186 ). | 1 | 3 |
People v. Lessanegreen2 sentences2023In People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d 174, 183 .-184 [1989], the Court of Appeals, while recognizing that "[s]ome degree of prejudice is of course inherent in every joint trial," provided that "severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in 1rreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that 15 [* 15] the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer defendant's guilt" (see People v Cardwell, 78 NY2d 996, 997-998 [1991]; People v Perry, 194 AD3d 849 , 850 [2d Dept 2021], Iv. denied 3iNY3d 1098 [2021]; Peop 2023Here, the various defenses amongst the defendant and his codefendants at trial were not in irreconcilable conflict ( see People v Peisahkman , 29 AD3d 352, 352 ; cf. People v Feliciano , 189 AD3d 416, 417 ; People v Lessane , 142 AD3d 562, 564 ). | 1 | 2 |
Bruton v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2010As we stated in our decision affirming the judgment convicting the codefendant of the same crimes (People v Thompson, 59 AD3d 1115, 1115 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 860 [2009]), the court properly concluded that “the core of each defense was not in irreconcilable conflict with the other” (see People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d 174, 183-184 [1989]; cf. People v Kyser, 26 AD3d 839, 840 [2006]), and we likewise conclude that there was no violation of defendant’s rights under Bruton v United States ( 391 US 123 [1968]) or Crawford v Washington ( 541 US 36 [2004]). 2008(Bruton v United States, 391 US 123, 135-136 [1968].) Our Court of Appeals in People v Cruz ( 66 NY2d 61, 73 [1985] ) 2 recognized that “severance is not required solely because of hostility between the defendants, differences in their trial strategies or inconsistencies in their defenses”; however, severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed that the conflict alone would lead a jury to infer defendants’ guilt. | 1 | 2 |
People v. Apolinargreen2 sentences2004Severance is not required solely because of hostilities among the defendants, differences in their trial strategies, or inconsistencies in their defenses, and is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant’s guilt” (People v Johnson, 296 AD2d 422 [2002] [internal quotation marks omitted]; People v Echevarria, 282 AD2d 470, 471 [2001]; People v Apolinar, 208 AD2d 548, 549 [1994]). 2001“It is well settled that severance motions are addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court * * * Severance is not required solely because of hostilities among the defendants, differences in their trial strategies, or inconsistencies in their defenses, and is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant’s guilt” (People v Apolinar, 208 AD2d 548, 549 ). | 1 | 2 |
People v. Mackgreen1 sentence2023In People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d 174, 183 .-184 [1989], the Court of Appeals, while recognizing that "[s]ome degree of prejudice is of course inherent in every joint trial," provided that "severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in 1rreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that 15 [* 15] the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer defendant's guilt" (see People v Cardwell, 78 NY2d 996, 997-998 [1991]; People v Perry, 194 AD3d 849 , 850 [2d Dept 2021], Iv. denied 3iNY3d 1098 [2021]; Peop | 1 | 1 |
People v. Jeangreen1 sentence2023In People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d 174, 183 .-184 [1989], the Court of Appeals, while recognizing that "[s]ome degree of prejudice is of course inherent in every joint trial," provided that "severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in 1rreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that 15 [* 15] the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer defendant's guilt" (see People v Cardwell, 78 NY2d 996, 997-998 [1991]; People v Perry, 194 AD3d 849 , 850 [2d Dept 2021], Iv. denied 3iNY3d 1098 [2021]; Peop | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hauck-Lapinskigreen1 sentence2023Moreover, where, as here, "the proof ofthe charges against the defendant will be premised on the same evidence used to establish [his] codefendant's guilt, only the most cogent reasons would warrant a severance" (People v Fassino, 169 AD3d 921 ,923 [2d Dept 2019], Iv. denied 33 NY3d 975 [2019]; see People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d at 183 ; People v Bornholdt, 33 NY2d 75, 87 [1973], cert. denied 416 US 905 [1974]; People v Gordon, 197 AD3d 723 , 724 [2d Dept 2021]; People v Boylan, 193 AD3d at 965; People v Caldwell, 150 AD3d at 1022; People v Turnbull, 52 AD3d 747 [2d Dept 2008], Iv. denied 11 NY3 | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Middletongreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Lanegreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Thompsongreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Dicksongreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Kysergreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Williamsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Richardson v. Marshgreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Poolegreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Cartergreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Bleakleygreen | 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. Turnbull
green
2 sentences2025Here, the defendant's and the codefendant's defenses were not in irreconcilable conflict ( see People v Boylan , 193 AD3d 964 ; People v Turnbull , 52 AD3d 747 ; cf. People v Mahboubian , 74 NY2d at 184 ). 2025Here, the defendant's and the codefendant's defenses were not in irreconcilable conflict ( see People v Boylan , 193 AD3d 964; People v Turnbull , 52 AD3d 747; cf. People v Mahboubian , 74 NY2d at 184). | 4 | 2010–2025 |
People v. Correa
green
2 sentences1998Severance is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant’s guilt (see, People v Cardwell, 78 NY2d 996 ; People v Mahboubian, supra; People v Correa, supra). 1996Severance is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant’s guilt (see, People v Cardwell, 78 NY2d 996, 997-998 ; People v Mahboubian, supra, at 183-184 ; People v Correa, supra). | 3 | 1994–1998 |
People v. Wallace
green
2 sentences2011Here, we conclude that the court erred in denying defendant’s requests that the jury be excused during the testimony of the bench trial codefendant, “[t]he logistics of [which] . . . were minimal,” inasmuch as at that time the People, defendant and his jury trial codefendant had rested, and thus the proof had closed with respect to the two defendants tried by the jury (Wallace, 153 AD2d at 65 ). 2011Here, we conclude that the court erred in denying defendant’s requests that the jury be excused during the testimony of the bench trial codefendant, “[t]he logistics of [which] . . . were minimal,” inasmuch as at that time the People, defendant and his jury trial codefendant had rested, and thus the proof had closed with respect to the two defendants tried by the jury (Wallace, 153 AD2d at 65 ). | 2 | 2011–2011 |
Crawford v. Washington
green
2 sentences2010As we stated in our decision affirming the judgment convicting the codefendant of the same crimes (People v Thompson, 59 AD3d 1115, 1115 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 860 [2009]), the court properly concluded that “the core of each defense was not in irreconcilable conflict with the other” (see People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d 174, 183-184 [1989]; cf. People v Kyser, 26 AD3d 839, 840 [2006]), and we likewise conclude that there was no violation of defendant’s rights under Bruton v United States ( 391 US 123 [1968]) or Crawford v Washington ( 541 US 36 [2004]). 2006Defendant further contends that reversal is required based on a Crawford violation (see Crawford v Washington, 541 US 36 [2004]). | 2 | 2006–2010 |
People v. Johnson
green
2 sentences2004Severance is not required solely because of hostilities among the defendants, differences in their trial strategies, or inconsistencies in their defenses, and is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant’s guilt” (People v Johnson, 296 AD2d 422 [2002] [internal quotation marks omitted]; People v Echevarria, 282 AD2d 470, 471 [2001]; People v Apolinar, 208 AD2d 548, 549 [1994]). 2002The defendant claimed that he acted in self defense in drawing a knife on the victim in connection with the assault and weapons charges against him, and the codefendant asserted, in defense of the murder charges against him, that a third party shot the victim (see People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d 174, 183-184 ; People v Johnson, 296 AD2d 422 ). | 2 | 2002–2004 |
Cruz v. New York
green
2 sentences1992Severance is not required solely because of hostilities between the defendants, differences in their trial strategies, or inconsistencies in their defenses, and is compelled only where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer a defendant’s guilt (People v Mahboubian, supra, at 183 ; People v Cruz, 66 NY2d 61, 73 , revd on other grounds 481 US 186 ). 1989It must appear that a joint trial necessarily will, or did, result in unfair prejudice to the moving party and substantially impair his defense” (People v Cruz, 66 NY2d 61, 73-74 , revd on other grounds 481 US 186 ). "[Severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in irreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer defendant’s guilt” (People v Mahbouhian, 74 NY2d 174, 184 ). | 2 | 1989–1992 |
People v. Turnbull
neutral
1 sentence2023Moreover, where, as here, "the proof ofthe charges against the defendant will be premised on the same evidence used to establish [his] codefendant's guilt, only the most cogent reasons would warrant a severance" (People v Fassino, 169 AD3d 921 ,923 [2d Dept 2019], Iv. denied 33 NY3d 975 [2019]; see People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d at 183 ; People v Bornholdt, 33 NY2d 75, 87 [1973], cert. denied 416 US 905 [1974]; People v Gordon, 197 AD3d 723 , 724 [2d Dept 2021]; People v Boylan, 193 AD3d at 965; People v Caldwell, 150 AD3d at 1022; People v Turnbull, 52 AD3d 747 [2d Dept 2008], Iv. denied 11 NY3 | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Gordon
green
1 sentence2023Moreover, where, as here, "the proof ofthe charges against the defendant will be premised on the same evidence used to establish [his] codefendant's guilt, only the most cogent reasons would warrant a severance" (People v Fassino, 169 AD3d 921 ,923 [2d Dept 2019], Iv. denied 33 NY3d 975 [2019]; see People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d at 183 ; People v Bornholdt, 33 NY2d 75, 87 [1973], cert. denied 416 US 905 [1974]; People v Gordon, 197 AD3d 723 , 724 [2d Dept 2021]; People v Boylan, 193 AD3d at 965; People v Caldwell, 150 AD3d at 1022; People v Turnbull, 52 AD3d 747 [2d Dept 2008], Iv. denied 11 NY3 | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Feliciano
neutral
1 sentence2023Here, the various defenses amongst the defendant and his codefendants at trial were not in irreconcilable conflict ( see People v Peisahkman , 29 AD3d 352, 352 ; cf. People v Feliciano , 189 AD3d 416, 417 ; People v Lessane , 142 AD3d 562, 564 ). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Perry
green
1 sentence2023In People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d 174, 183 .-184 [1989], the Court of Appeals, while recognizing that "[s]ome degree of prejudice is of course inherent in every joint trial," provided that "severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in 1rreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that 15 [* 15] the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer defendant's guilt" (see People v Cardwell, 78 NY2d 996, 997-998 [1991]; People v Perry, 194 AD3d 849 , 850 [2d Dept 2021], Iv. denied 3iNY3d 1098 [2021]; Peop | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Peisahkman
green
1 sentence2023Here, the various defenses amongst the defendant and his codefendants at trial were not in irreconcilable conflict ( see People v Peisahkman , 29 AD3d 352, 352 ; cf. People v Feliciano , 189 AD3d 416, 417 ; People v Lessane , 142 AD3d 562, 564 ). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Bank of Commerce v. City National Bank
green
1 sentence2023Moreover, where, as here, "the proof ofthe charges against the defendant will be premised on the same evidence used to establish [his] codefendant's guilt, only the most cogent reasons would warrant a severance" (People v Fassino, 169 AD3d 921 ,923 [2d Dept 2019], Iv. denied 33 NY3d 975 [2019]; see People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d at 183 ; People v Bornholdt, 33 NY2d 75, 87 [1973], cert. denied 416 US 905 [1974]; People v Gordon, 197 AD3d 723 , 724 [2d Dept 2021]; People v Boylan, 193 AD3d at 965; People v Caldwell, 150 AD3d at 1022; People v Turnbull, 52 AD3d 747 [2d Dept 2008], Iv. denied 11 NY3 | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Boyd
green
1 sentence2023In People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d 174, 183 .-184 [1989], the Court of Appeals, while recognizing that "[s]ome degree of prejudice is of course inherent in every joint trial," provided that "severance is compelled where the core of each defense is in 1rreconcilable conflict with the other and where there is a significant danger, as both defenses are portrayed to the trial court, that 15 [* 15] the conflict alone would lead the jury to infer defendant's guilt" (see People v Cardwell, 78 NY2d 996, 997-998 [1991]; People v Perry, 194 AD3d 849 , 850 [2d Dept 2021], Iv. denied 3iNY3d 1098 [2021]; Peop | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Clark
green
1 sentence2023Moreover, where, as here, "the proof ofthe charges against the defendant will be premised on the same evidence used to establish [his] codefendant's guilt, only the most cogent reasons would warrant a severance" (People v Fassino, 169 AD3d 921 ,923 [2d Dept 2019], Iv. denied 33 NY3d 975 [2019]; see People v Mahboubian, 74 NY2d at 183 ; People v Bornholdt, 33 NY2d 75, 87 [1973], cert. denied 416 US 905 [1974]; People v Gordon, 197 AD3d 723 , 724 [2d Dept 2021]; People v Boylan, 193 AD3d at 965; People v Caldwell, 150 AD3d at 1022; People v Turnbull, 52 AD3d 747 [2d Dept 2008], Iv. denied 11 NY3 | 1 | 2023–2023 |
| People v. Irizarry green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| People v. Ricardo B. green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| People v. Trank green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| People v. Sabatino green | 1 | 2008–2008 |
| People v. Torres green | 1 | 2006–2006 |
| People v. Suitte green | 1 | 1999–1999 |
| People v. Seshadri neutral | 1 | 1999–1999 |
| Blum v. Warden neutral | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.