CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 30, 2004

People v. Dalton

The defendant appealed a judgment from Chenango County Court following her conviction on multiple counts of sexual misconduct, rape, use of a child in a sexual performance, incest, criminal solicitation, and endangering the welfare of a child involving her three children. The appellate court found that the criminal solicitation charges should have been dismissed due to a statutory exemption and that several counts (rape, incest, use of a child in a sexual performance, and criminal solicitation) were duplicitous, requiring their dismissal with leave for the People to resubmit nonduplicitous charges. However, the court affirmed the lower court's decisions regarding the denial of a juror for cause, access to confidential counseling records, proper impeachment of a witness, and the refusal to charge the jury on accomplice testimony. The imposed maximum sentence for the remaining convictions (course of sexual conduct against a child and endangering the welfare of a child) was upheld.

Criminal LawSexual AbuseChild EndangermentIncestRapeCriminal SolicitationDuplicitous IndictmentAccomplice TestimonyAppellate ProcedureEvidence
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 23, 1987

People v. Wilens

The defendant appealed a conviction for first-degree sodomy and incest from Dutchess County. The appeal concerned the admissibility of a social worker's testimony regarding prior consistent statements made by the five-year-old victim. The defendant argued that the social worker's testimony improperly bolstered the victim's repudiated Grand Jury testimony, which the defense implied was fabricated under the Assistant District Attorney's influence. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, ruling that the social worker's testimony was properly admitted to rehabilitate the victim's testimony against claims of recent fabrication.

sodomyincestchild victimcross-examinationprior consistent statementsrecent fabricationrehabilitation of witnessappellate reviewadmissibility of evidencewitness testimony
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Bosilkofski

The defendant appealed a judgment convicting him of seven counts of incest after a bench trial. He claimed insufficient corroboration of his daughter's testimony, collateral estoppel due to a Family Court dismissal of an abuse petition, and ineffective assistance of counsel. The court found sufficient corroboration, citing medical evidence of vaginal abrasions, seminal fluid presence, and a profile consistent with sexual abuse, despite a vasectomy. Collateral estoppel was deemed unpreserved and inapplicable due to non-identical issues and parties between the Family Court and criminal proceedings. The claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was rejected, as the record showed successful dismissal of numerous indictment counts and effective representation.

IncestPenal LawCollateral EstoppelIneffective Assistance of CounselCorroborationAccomplice TestimonyVaginal AbrasionsAcid PhosphataseVasectomyImpotence
References
12
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 00066 [179 AD3d 427]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 07, 2020

Matter of Katherine U. (Jose U.)

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed a Family Court order finding Jose U. sexually abused his child, Katherine U., and dismissed the appeal from the fact-finding order. The court upheld the use of closed-circuit television for the child's testimony, balancing the father's due process rights with the child's emotional well-being, as contemporaneous cross-examination by counsel was permitted. An affidavit from the child's social worker sufficiently established that in-court testimony would cause emotional harm. Furthermore, Jose U.'s prior criminal convictions for predatory sexual assault, rape, incest, and sexual abuse, involving the child, collaterally estopped him from contesting the abuse allegations in the family court petition.

Child abuseSexual abuseFamily LawAppellate ProcedureDue ProcessChild TestimonyClosed-circuit televisionCollateral EstoppelCriminal ConvictionEvidence Admissibility
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Guce

The defendant appealed a judgment convicting him of rape, sodomy, sexual abuse, incest, and endangering the welfare of a child. The appeal challenged the Supreme Court's decision to allow the child victims to testify via live, two-way, closed-circuit television, with the defendant remaining outside the room, citing their vulnerability and potential for severe emotional harm. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding that these procedures were constitutional and supported by clear and convincing evidence of extraordinary circumstances and the children's vulnerability. The court also found no error in allowing sworn and unsworn testimony, the use of anatomically correct dolls, or the admissibility of expert testimony regarding child sexual abuse syndrome, distinguishing the case from previous rulings.

Child Sexual AbuseVulnerable WitnessesConfrontation ClauseClosed-Circuit Television TestimonyWitness TraumaAppellate ReviewSixth AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentExpert TestimonyPosttraumatic Stress Syndrome
References
10
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 00504 [157 AD3d 1176]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 25, 2018

Matter of Gainey v. Stanford

Petitioner, Curtis L. Gainey, initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge the Board of Parole's determination revoking his parole and imposing a 24-month hold. Gainey, convicted of incest in 2001, was paroled in 2014 and subsequently charged with violating parole conditions for failing to participate in and pay for required sex offender treatment. An Administrative Law Judge and the Board of Parole sustained these charges. The Appellate Division, Third Department, confirmed the determination, finding substantial evidence that Gainey failed to comply with his parole conditions despite having the financial means and opportunities to do so. The court dismissed the petition, also noting that Gainey's challenge to the length of his time assessment became moot upon his re-release to parole supervision.

Parole revocationSex offender treatmentCPLR article 78Substantial evidenceParole violationAdministrative lawMootnessCredibility determinationAppellate reviewIncest conviction
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State v. Hart

Doyle Hart was convicted of aggravated rape and incest. His stepdaughter, B.J., later recanted her trial testimony, leading Hart to file a petition for writ of error coram nobis for a new trial based on this newly discovered evidence. The trial court denied the petition, citing B.J.'s reassertion of her original testimony while in a mental health facility and the results of an unfavorable polygraph examination taken by Hart. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed and remanded the case for a new evidentiary hearing. The appellate court found that the trial court improperly considered evidence outside the record, specifically B.J.'s post-hearing statements and the polygraph results, violating principles of judicial procedure and evidence.

Aggravated RapeIncestRecanted TestimonyWrit of Error Coram NobisNewly Discovered EvidenceJudicial MisconductEvidence Outside RecordPolygraph ExaminationCredibility AssessmentChild Abuse
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 09, 2002

People v. Greene

The defendant was convicted of rape, incest, sodomy, sexual abuse, and intimidating a victim or witness in the third degree against his daughter. On appeal, the defendant argued that statements made to a CPS caseworker were obtained in violation of his right to counsel and that the County Court failed to provide cautionary instructions for prior bad acts evidence. The appellate court determined the CPS caseworker acted as an agent of the police, making the statements inadmissible on direct examination but permissible for impeachment after the defendant's denial. However, the court found that the trial court's failure to provide limiting instructions regarding the prior bad acts evidence and defense counsel's omissions seriously compromised the defendant's right to a fair trial. Consequently, the judgment was reversed, and the matter was remitted for a new trial.

Criminal LawSexual AssaultChild AbuseRight to CounselPrior Bad ActsImpeachment EvidenceLimiting InstructionsFair TrialAgency RelationshipCPS Caseworker
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Nassau County Department of Social Services v. Steven K.

The father appealed a Family Court dispositional order from Nassau County, which, based on findings of child abuse and neglect against his daughters Meredith K. and Erika K., barred his visitation until he completed an incest offender program. The appellate court reviewed the underlying fact-finding order, acknowledging that out-of-court child statements, when properly corroborated by expert validation testimony, can support abuse findings. While upholding the findings of finger insertion into Meredith's vagina and touching Erika's vagina, the court reversed the more severe allegation of penile intercourse with Meredith due to conflicting medical evidence suggesting normal hymenal findings. Consequently, the dispositional order was reversed, and the matter was remitted to the Family Court for a new determination, recognizing the prior order may have been unduly influenced by the vacated finding.

Child AbuseChild NeglectFamily Court ActAppellate ReviewDispositional OrderFact-Finding OrderSexual Abuse AllegationsCorroboration of Child StatementsValidation TestimonyMedical Evidence
References
8
Case No. E2022-01468-CCA-R3-CD
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 11, 2024

State of Tennessee v. David Lynn Richards, Jr.

The Defendant, David Lynn Richards, Jr., appealed his Knox County Criminal Court convictions for multiple sexual offenses, including sexual battery, rape, statutory rape, and incest, against his adopted daughter. He challenged the convictions based on claims of newly discovered forensic biological and electronic evidence, suppressed mental health records, due process violations under Brady and Ritchie, and ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Richards also contested the sufficiency of evidence, double jeopardy for dual convictions, and the trial court's sentencing decisions. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgments on all grounds, finding no abuse of discretion in denying a new trial, no plain error, and that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions. The court also upheld the denial of alternative sentencing and the imposition of a partially consecutive sentence.

Sexual BatteryRapeStatutory RapeIncestChild AbuseForensic DNAElectronic EvidenceICloud DataIneffective CounselBrady Disclosure
References
94
Showing 1-10 of 12 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational