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. 2025 NY Slip Op 05850
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 23, 2025

People v. Flanigan

Defendant Razeah S. Flanigan appealed convictions for assault in the second degree and reckless endangerment in the second degree, stemming from an incident where he fired a flare gun, injuring the victim's arm. The Appellate Division, Third Department, reviewed the weight of the evidence for the assault conviction, concluding that the victim suffered a serious physical injury due to disfigurement and protracted impairment. The court affirmed the assault conviction but found that reckless endangerment in the second degree was an erroneous lesser included offense of assault in the first degree, though harmless as it was a proper lesser included offense of another count. Ultimately, the court determined that reckless endangerment in the second degree was a lesser included offense of assault in the second degree, leading to the dismissal of the reckless endangerment conviction. The judgment was modified to dismiss the conviction on count 3 and affirmed as modified.

Assault Second DegreeReckless EndangermentSerious Physical InjuryLesser Included OffenseFlare Gun InjuryCriminal Weapon PossessionJustification DefenseWeight of Evidence ReviewAppellate DivisionConviction Modification
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 13, 1987

People v. Stevenson

The defendant was convicted of two counts of attempted murder in the second degree, one count of assault in the first degree, and two counts of assault in the second degree after repeatedly stabbing his wife and forcing his stepdaughter out a window. On appeal, the court considered whether a lesser included offense charge for reckless assault should have been given, concluding that there was insufficient evidence of intoxication to warrant it. The court also held that the conviction for assault in the second degree under the fourth count of the indictment should be reversed and dismissed as it constituted a lesser included offense of assault in the first degree, and a defendant cannot be simultaneously convicted of both. The judgment was largely affirmed, but modified to dismiss the aforementioned assault charge.

Attempted MurderAssaultLesser Included OffenseIntoxication DefenseCriminal AppealPrior Inconsistent StatementHearsaySpousal AbuseChild EndangermentJury Charge
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 28, 2008

People v. Beauharnois

This case is an appeal from a judgment convicting the defendant of sexual abuse, course of sexual conduct, predatory sexual assault, predatory sexual assault against a child, and endangering the welfare of a child. The conviction stemmed from a victim's testimony detailing years of sexual abuse by the defendant, corroborated by a pediatrician's expert medical testimony. On appeal, the defendant challenged the verdict's weight of evidence and argued that the course of sexual conduct conviction was a lesser included offense of predatory sexual assault. The appellate court affirmed the jury's credibility findings and the medical evidence. It modified the judgment by dismissing the conviction for course of sexual conduct as a lesser included offense, but upheld the conviction for endangering the welfare of a child and the sentences imposed.

Sexual abusePredatory sexual assaultChild endangermentLesser included offenseAppellate reviewVictim credibilityExpert medical testimonyCriminal convictionSentencingJudicial discretion
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Martinez v. State

John Gilbert Martinez, 15 at the time of the offense, was convicted of capital murder for his role in the shooting death of Hyeon Ju Lee and the attempted murder of Jae Kyung Lee during a robbery at their Dollar Plus store. Martinez and an accomplice, Paul Vara, shot both owners and tried to open the cash register. Martinez confessed to the crime, detailing his use of Vara's gun and the shootings. On appeal, Martinez challenged several aspects, including the admission of undisclosed witnesses, the voluntariness of his confession, and the trial court's refusal to include lesser-included offense charges. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no reversible error in the proceedings.

Capital murderJuvenile offenderConfession voluntarinessWitness disclosureLesser included offenseJury deadlockAllen chargeAppellate reviewDue processConfrontation Clause
References
46
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Britt

This appeal concerns a defendant convicted in Albany County of assault in the first and second degrees and endangering the welfare of a child, following severe brain injuries and multiple fractures sustained by her six-month-old son. The defendant challenged the lower court's refusal to dismiss the top assault charge, its denial of a lesser-included offense instruction for assault in the third degree, and the severity of her sentence. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding ample evidence of depraved indifference to human life, particularly given the defendant's admitted repeated abuse and prior parenting classes regarding the dangers of shaking an infant. The court also upheld the refusal to charge a lesser offense and found no abuse of discretion in the sentencing.

Child AbuseAssault First DegreeAssault Second DegreeEndangering Welfare of a ChildDepraved IndifferenceReckless AssaultLesser Included OffenseSentencing DiscretionAppellate ReviewBrain Injury
References
27
Case No. 08-24-00146-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 23, 2025

Eduardo Santillana Garza v. the State of Texas

Eduardo Santillana Garza was convicted of capital murder and aggravated robbery following a jury trial in El Paso County, Texas. He received a life sentence without parole for capital murder and 40 years for aggravated robbery, to run concurrently. The capital murder conviction stemmed from the shooting death of Miguel Rivera, Sr. during the course of a burglary or aggravated robbery, and the aggravated robbery conviction from shooting Abelardo Moreno during a theft. On appeal, Garza argued the trial court erred by denying his request for a lesser-included instruction on burglary offenses. The Court of Appeals found no error, concluding that any separate burglary Garza may have committed on a different date was not an "included" offense of the capital murder charge as alleged in the indictment. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment.

Criminal LawCapital MurderAggravated RobberyLesser-Included OffenseAppellate ReviewJury TrialEvidence SufficiencyTexas Penal CodeBurglary of HabitationBurglary of Building
References
13
Case No. 12-13-00041-CR, 12-13-00042-CR
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2014

Davina Wilson Moore v. State

Davina Wilson Moore appealed her convictions for possession of a controlled substance (hydromorphone) and possession of marijuana in a drug-free zone. She raised five issues, including challenges to the indictment, a warrantless home search, exclusion of evidence, admission of evidence, and jury instructions. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment on all counts. The court found that the indictment was sufficient, the warrantless search was justified by consent and exigent circumstances, the exclusion of her husband's confession was not an error, the admission of unsealed medicine vials was proper to rebut her defense of mistake, and there was no error in the jury charge regarding special instructions or a lesser-included offense.

Controlled substancesMarijuanaDrug offensesAppellate reviewSearch and seizureMotion to suppressEvidence admissibilityJury instructionsLegal procedureTexas law
References
47
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 22, 2004

Rodgers v. State

Warren Keith Rodgers appealed his murder conviction in Wood County for the death of his wife, Amanda, who was killed on railroad tracks. Rodgers raised seven points of error, including challenges to the legal and factual sufficiency of evidence, the qualification of the State's expert on tire and shoe prints, the legality of a search warrant, the denial of a change of venue, and the refusal of a lesser-included offense instruction. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding the evidence sufficient, the expert qualified, the search warrant valid, and no abuse of discretion in the trial court's rulings on venue and jury instructions. It also rejected claims of due process and confrontation clause violations regarding victim statements, concluding they were not testimonial.

Murder convictionAppellate reviewEvidentiary sufficiencyExpert testimony admissibilityDaubert challengeFourth AmendmentSearch warrantChange of venue motionJury instructionsLesser included offense
References
38
Case No. M2002-02124-CCA-R3-PC
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 15, 2003

Milburn L. Edwards v. State of Tennessee

Milburn L. Edwards appealed the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief by the Davidson County Criminal Court. Edwards argued that the post-conviction court failed to state findings of fact and conclusions of law, that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal, and that he was not afforded a full and fair evidentiary hearing. The Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the judgment of the post-conviction court, finding no error in the proceedings below. The court addressed multiple claims of ineffective assistance, including failures to challenge the arrest warrant, object to delays, raise a conspiracy defense, suppress identification, request special jury instructions, challenge sufficiency of evidence, object to false testimony, preserve lesser-included offenses, object to the introduction of coins, object to a 1982 photograph, and challenge a prior guilty plea.

Post-Conviction ReliefIneffective Assistance of CounselDue ProcessSpeedy TrialIdentification IssuesSufficiency of EvidenceLesser-Included OffensesPrior Bad ActsGuilty PleaCriminal Procedure
References
40
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hudson v. State

Cynthia Ann Hudson was convicted of capital murder for the death of her adopted son, Samuel, who died from blunt force trauma and starvation after prolonged abuse. Hudson appealed, raising nine points of error, including challenges to the sufficiency of evidence for intent to kill and kidnapping, constitutional arguments against the kidnapping statute, and the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of manslaughter. The appellate court found the evidence sufficient to support the jury's findings on intent to kill and kidnapping and rejected Hudson's constitutional challenges. However, the court reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial, concluding that Hudson was harmfully denied a jury instruction on manslaughter, as there was evidence from which a rational jury could have found she acted recklessly. This decision highlights the legal distinction between intentional murder and reckless manslaughter in the context of child abuse.

Capital MurderKidnappingManslaughterLesser-Included OffenseChild AbuseBlunt Force TraumaStarvationEvidentiary SufficiencyIntent to KillParental Rights
References
51
Showing 1-10 of 7,368 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