Search for: "N.E. V. STATE" Results 481 - 500 of 2,698
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Sep 2018, 4:16 pm by Brian Shiffrin
"A defendant need not show [either] a pattern of discrimination'" (People v Anthony, 152 AD3d 1048, 1050, 61 N.Y.S.3d 151 [3d Dept 2017]) or, as the court stated here, "a systematic approach by the prosecution. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 6:10 am by Joel R. Brandes
Such written agreement must state that it will be the responsibility of the adoptive parent(s) to inform the appropriate State or local official when they are no longer legally responsible for the child or no longer providing any support to the child” (18 NYCRR 421.24[c][5]). [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 6:10 am by Joel R. Brandes
Such written agreement must state that it will be the responsibility of the adoptive parent(s) to inform the appropriate State or local official when they are no longer legally responsible for the child or no longer providing any support to the child” (18 NYCRR 421.24[c][5]). [read post]
27 Aug 2018, 5:15 pm by Brian Shiffrin
 As we have repeatedly instructed, such "departures from the O'Rama procedures are not subject to preservation rules" (People v Walston, 23 NY3d 986, 989, 991 N.Y.S.2d 24, 14 N.E.3d 377 [2014] [citations omitted]). [read post]
12 Aug 2018, 4:34 pm by Brian Shiffrin
It is well established, however, that a defendant's mere presence in the area where drugs are discovered is insufficient to establish constructive possession (see Boyd, 145 AD3d at 1482; People v Knightner, 11 AD3d 1002, 1004, 782 N.Y.S.2d 333 [4th Dept 2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 745, 824 N.E.2d 59, 790 N.Y.S.2d 658 [2004]).People v Williams, 2018 N.Y. [read post]
2 Aug 2018, 4:18 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
New York County 2012), citing, Mosher-Simons v County of Allegany, 99 NY2d 214, 219, 783 N.E.2d 509, 753 N.Y.S.2d 444 (2002), quoting Tarter v State of New York. 68 NY2d 511, 518, 503 N.E.2d 84, 510 N.Y.S.2d 528 (1986). [read post]
4 Jul 2018, 11:40 am by Amy Howe
Casey, the 1992 decision reaffirming Roe v. [read post]