Search for: "People v. Conte"
Results 41 - 60
of 259
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 May 2015, 3:54 pm
., People v Malone, 180 Misc 2d 744). [read post]
22 May 2015, 12:26 pm
To Be Cont... [read post]
21 May 2015, 3:49 pm
Nothing in the statute restricts its application solely to harmful conduct directed at children (see, People v Bergerson, 17 [95 N.Y.2d 372] NY2d 398, 401 [noting that the prior version of statute was intended to be broad in scope]). [read post]
20 May 2015, 3:20 pm
In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. [read post]
20 May 2015, 1:58 pm
95 N.Y.2d 368 740 N.E.2d 1075 718 N.Y.S.2d 1 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent-Appellant, v. [read post]
19 May 2015, 5:12 pm
As outlined in People v. [read post]
19 Apr 2015, 2:13 pm
Since the court did not enter any factual findings, as it does when a parent consents to the jurisdiction of the court under Section 1051(a) of the Family Court Act in Article X proceedings, no adjudication on the merits took place (Mirelle F. v Renol F., 4 Misc 3d 1011(a) [Sup Ct Queens County 2004]) and there is nothing which could affect or bind the Petitioner in the future (Metz v People, 73 Misc 2d 219 [Sup Ct Nassau County 1973]; Lockwood v Lockwood, 23 Misc… [read post]
18 Apr 2015, 3:44 pm
In addition to the confidentiality of the information sought, a subpoena duces tecum may not be used for purposes of procuring discovery, or to ascertain the existence of evidence (see Matter of Amex v Vinci, 63 AD3d 1055 [2d Dept. 2009]; Matter of Terry D., 81 NY2d 1042, 1044 [1993], citing People v Gissendanner, 48 NY2d 543, 551 [1979]). [read post]
17 Apr 2015, 1:53 pm
(See People v. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 3:31 pm
We reiterate, however, that each case is fact specific (see, People v West, 271 AD2d 806; People v Brooks, 270 AD2d 206, lv denied 95 NY2d 794; People v Parr, 155 AD2d 945, lv denied 75 NY2d 870 [all holding that a defendant who performs a significant act of domestic violence against a mother in the presence of a child is guilty of endangering the welfare of that child]). [95 N.Y.2d 374] With respect to defendant's appeal, the issues… [read post]
15 Apr 2015, 11:19 am
95 N.Y.2d 368 740 N.E.2d 1075 718 N.Y.S.2d 1 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent-Appellant, v. [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 2:19 pm
Chapin, 299 AD2d 294; Kent v. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 3:24 pm
Jean Baudrillard (2002, p. 149) talks about freedom as a concept and a practice, for him the choices and customization capabilities are actually a mechanism of integration between people. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 2:34 pm
This is what distinguishes the present case from People v. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 11:38 am
Since the court did not enter any factual findings, as it does when a parent consents to the jurisdiction of the court under Section 1051(a) of the Family Court Act in Article X proceedings, no adjudication on the merits took place (Mirelle F. v Renol F., 4 Misc 3d 1011(a) [Sup Ct Queens County 2004]) and there is nothing which could affect or bind the Petitioner in the future (Metz v People, 73 Misc 2d 219 [Sup Ct Nassau County 1973]; Lockwood v Lockwood, 23 Misc… [read post]
12 Apr 2015, 2:05 pm
Gonzalez, 262 AD2d 281; Silver v. [read post]
12 Apr 2015, 11:23 am
In addition to the confidentiality of the information sought, a subpoena duces tecum may not be used for purposes of procuring discovery, or to ascertain the existence of evidence (see Matter of Amex v Vinci, 63 AD3d 1055 [2d Dept. 2009]; Matter of Terry D., 81 NY2d 1042, 1044 [1993], citing People v Gissendanner, 48 NY2d 543, 551 [1979]). [read post]
11 Apr 2015, 5:13 pm
Rosencrants, 89 Misc.2d 721, 392 N.Y.S.2d 808; People v. [read post]
11 Apr 2015, 4:57 pm
(People v. [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 12:40 pm
(See People v Casey, supra; see also People v Miles, 64 NY2d 731 [1984] [read post]
