People v. Robinson, 82 A.D.3d 1130 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Robinson, 82 A.D.3d 1130 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
25 citation events (25 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: People v. Guerrero (nyappdiv, 2017-05-03)
Treatment trajectory · 2011 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2011 2018 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Guerrero
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
Evidence of the defendant’s guilt of each of the crimes of which he was convicted, without reference to the error, was overwhelming, and there is no significant probability that the error contributed to the conviction (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242 [1975]; People v Wongsam, 105 AD3d 980, 981-982 [2013]; People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]). *886 The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Borgella
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
In addition, the Supreme Court improperly modified its Sandoval ruling by permitting the prosecutor to question the defendant regarding his alleged gang affiliation and the prior violent incident, as the defendant did not “open the door” to the otherwise precluded evidence (see People v Wongsam, 105 AD3d 980, 981 [2013]; People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1131 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Clarke
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Thus, a review of the totality of the circumstances demonstrates that the defendant’s statements were voluntarily made (see People v Wilkinson, 120 AD3d at 521 ; People v Winkfield, 90 AD3d 959, 960 [2011]; People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]; People v Saunders, 71 AD3d at 1059-1060 ). *749 The defendant preserved his challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting the convictions of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and resisting arrest, but failed to preserve his challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting the assau…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Gelin
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
A review of the totality of the circumstances (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d at 413 ; People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38 [1977]) demonstrates that the defendant, who voluntarily accompanied the police to the precinct, was not in custody until after he was informed of his Miranda rights (see Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436 [1966]; People v Martin, 68 AD3d 1015 [2009]; People v Pegues, 59 AD3d 570 [2009]; People v Ellerbe, 265 AD2d 569 [1999]; People v Petrovich, 202 AD2d 523 , 524 [1994], affd 87 NY2d 961 [1996]), and his statements to the police, which were given after he was informed of, and waived…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Wilkinson
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
A review of the totality of the circumstances demonstrates that the defendant’s statements were voluntarily made (see People v Winkfield, 90 AD3d 959, 960 [2011]; People v Seabrooks, *522 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]; People v Saunders, 71 AD3d at 1059-1060 ).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Wongsam
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Contrary to the court’s determination, the defendant did not testify about this prior conviction or to facts in conflict with the precluded evidence, and therefore did not “open the door” to the otherwise precluded evidence (see People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1131 [2011]; People v Perez, 40 AD3d 1131, 1132 [2007]; cf. People v Fardan, 82 NY2d 638, 646 [1993]; People v Gross, 88 AD3d 905, 905 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Wongsam
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Contrary to the court’s determination, the defendant did not testify about this prior conviction or to facts in conflict with the precluded evidence, and therefore did not “open the door” to the otherwise precluded evidence (see People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1131 [2011]; People v Perez, 40 AD3d 1131, 1132 [2007]; cf. People v Fardan, 82 NY2d 638, 646 [1993]; People v Gross, 88 AD3d 905, 905 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Pinto
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
A review of the totality of the circumstances (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 413 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38 [1977]) demonstrates that the defendant’s statements to the police, which were given after he was informed of, and waived, his Miranda rights (see Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436 [1966]), were voluntarily made (see CPL 60.45 [1]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d at 414 ; People v Huntley, 15 NY2d 72 [1965]; People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Pinto
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
A review of the totality of the circumstances (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 413 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38 [1977]) demonstrates that the defendant’s statements to the police, which were given after he was informed of, and waived, his Miranda rights (see Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436 [1966]), were voluntarily made (see CPL 60.45 [1]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d at 414 ; People v Huntley, 15 NY2d 72 [1965]; People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Lacey
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Under these circumstances, the instructions must be deemed to have cured any errors to the defendant’s satisfaction (see People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1131-1132 [2011]; People v Campbell, 68 AD3d 890, 890-891 [2009]; People v Hamm, 42 AD3d 550, 551 [2007]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Lacey
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Under these circumstances, the instructions must be deemed to have cured any errors to the defendant’s satisfaction (see People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1131-1132 [2011]; People v Campbell, 68 AD3d 890, 890-891 [2009]; People v Hamm, 42 AD3d 550, 551 [2007]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Taylor
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
A review of the totality of the circumstances (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 413 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38 [1977]) demonstrates that the defendant’s statements to the police, which were given after she was informed of, and waived, her Miranda rights (see Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436 [1966]), were voluntarily made (see CPL 60.45 [1]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d at 414 ; People v Huntley, 15 NY2d 72 [1965]; People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Taylor
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
A review of the totality of the circumstances (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 413 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38 [1977]) demonstrates that the defendant’s statements to the police, which were given after she was informed of, and waived, her Miranda rights (see Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436 [1966]), were voluntarily made (see CPL 60.45 [1]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d at 414 ; People v Huntley, 15 NY2d 72 [1965]; People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Nimmons
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
A review of the totality of the circumstances (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 413 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38 [1977]) demonstrates that the defendant’s oral and written statements to the police, which were given after he was informed of, and waived, his Miranda rights (see Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436 [1966]), were voluntarily made (see CPL 60.45 [1]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d at 414 ; People v Huntley, 15 NY2d 72 [1965]; People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Nimmons
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
A review of the totality of the circumstances (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 413 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38 [1977]) demonstrates that the defendant’s oral and written statements to the police, which were given after he was informed of, and waived, his Miranda rights (see Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436 [1966]), were voluntarily made (see CPL 60.45 [1]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d at 414 ; People v Huntley, 15 NY2d 72 [1965]; People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Gibson
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · confidence medium
The defendant received the minimum sentence allowable for a second felony offender convicted of a class C violent felony offense (see Penal Law § 70.06 [6] [b]; People v Berrouet, 84 AD3d 1392 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 813 [2011]; People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1132 [2011]).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Anselmo
N.Y. App. Div. · 2018 · signal: see · confidence high
Thus, the court's curative instruction "must be deemed to have corrected [any] error to the defendant's satisfaction" ( People v Heide , 84 NY2d 943, 944 ; see People v Seabrooks , 82 AD3d 1130, 1131-1132 ).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Jin Cheng Lin
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
Accordingly, our “review of the totality of the circumstances demonstrates that the defendant’s statements] w[ere] voluntarily made” (People v Winkfield, 90 AD3d 959, 960 [2011]; see People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Jin Cheng Lin
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
Accordingly, our “review of the totality of the circumstances demonstrates that the defendant’s statements] w[ere] voluntarily made” (People v Winkfield, 90 AD3d 959, 960 [2011]; see People v Seabrooks, 82 AD3d 1130, 1130-1131 [2011]).
The People of the State of New York
v.
Kristopher Robinson
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Mar 22, 2011.
82 A.D.3d 1130
Published

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Mastro, J.E, Angiolillo, Balkin, Lott and Miller, JJ., concur.