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. CPL article 440 motion
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 01, 2011

People v. G.M.

Defendant G.M. moved to vacate six convictions—two for prostitution, two for criminal trespass, and two for drug possession—which occurred between September 1997 and January 1998. G.M. contended she was a victim of human trafficking and severe domestic abuse by her husband, D.S., who forced her into illegal activities under threat of violence. The New York State Legislature amended Criminal Procedure Law § 440.10 in August 2010, allowing sex trafficking victims to vacate prostitution-related convictions. The Queens County District Attorney's Office consented to G.M.'s motion for all six convictions, citing her truthful affidavit and the unique circumstances. On April 1, 2011, the court granted the motion, vacating all judgments of conviction and dismissing the accusatory instruments, recognizing G.M.'s status as a trafficking victim, which was also recognized by a federal agency that granted her a 'T Visa'.

Human TraffickingSex TraffickingVacatur of ConvictionsCriminal Procedure Law § 440.10Prostitution OffensesCriminal TrespassDrug PossessionDomestic ViolenceCoercionAbuse
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 01, 1992

People v. Ramos

Alberto Ramos was convicted of two counts of first-degree rape in 1985. Seven years later, Ramos filed a motion under CPL 440.10 to vacate his conviction, alleging the prosecution withheld crucial Rosario and Brady material. The undisclosed documents contained evidence favorable to the defense, including information about the child victim's prior sexual knowledge, masturbation, inconsistencies in her statements, and a discrepancy regarding who picked her up from day-care. The court found that the prosecution failed to disclose these materials and that there was a reasonable possibility the verdict would have been different had they been disclosed. The Supreme Court's order granting Ramos's motion to set aside the conviction and ordering a new trial was unanimously affirmed.

Sexual AbuseChild VictimRosario MaterialBrady MaterialProsecutorial MisconductWithheld EvidenceCPL 440.10 MotionVacate ConvictionNew Trial OrderedWitness Credibility
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Ford

The defendant appealed a judgment from the Supreme Court, Kings County, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, and an order denying his motion to vacate the said judgment. The appeals court affirmed the order and judgment. Justice Suozzi dissented, arguing that the defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel because his attorney withdrew a crucial alibi defense, despite available witnesses and evidence. The dissent highlighted the trial justice's dissatisfaction with defense counsel's performance and argued that the lower court erred in denying the motion to vacate without a hearing, asserting that the counsel's representation was totally ineffective, rendering the defense meaningless.

Criminal Procedure LawIneffective assistance of counselAlibi defenseRobbery convictionMotion to vacate judgmentAppellate reviewTrial strategyDissenting opinionLegal Aid SocietyCriminal appeal
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Wilson

Petitioner Wayne Wilson filed a motion to vacate his conviction for conspiracy to distribute marijuana and attempted possession with intent to distribute, alleging six instances of ineffective assistance of counsel. His claims included failure to move to suppress post-arrest statements, failure to formulate a trial strategy, failure to review and investigate evidence, failure to discuss a plea offer, failure to call certain witnesses, and failure to effectively cross-examine government witnesses. The Court, presided over by Judge William F. Kuntz, II, denied the motion in its entirety. The Court found that counsel's performance was not deficient under the Strickland standard for any of the claims and that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice. Additionally, the Court denied Petitioner's request for an evidentiary hearing, concluding it was unnecessary given the existing record.

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel28 U.S.C. § 2255Motion to VacateCriminal ConvictionSixth AmendmentDrug ConspiracyMarijuana DistributionPlea BargainingTrial StrategyWitness Testimony
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 24, 1985

People v. Gamble

Defendant was convicted of first and second-degree robbery following a jury trial for an incident on April 8, 1984, involving a subway token booth robbery in Manhattan. After his arrest, and despite invoking his right to remain silent, Detective Clinton engaged the defendant, leading to oral and written admissions. The trial court denied the defendant's motion to suppress these statements, deeming them spontaneous. On appeal, even the prosecution conceded some admissions were unlawfully obtained. This dissenting opinion argues that all of defendant's oral and written statements should have been suppressed as they were obtained in violation of his constitutional rights and were not spontaneous. The dissent concludes that the judgment of conviction should be reversed, the statements suppressed, the conviction vacated, and the matter remanded for a new trial.

RobberyFirst Degree RobberySecond Degree RobberyMiranda WarningsRight to Remain SilentRight to CounselSuppression of StatementsSpontaneous StatementsInterrogation EnvironmentHarmless Error
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Dozier

The case People v. Dozier addresses whether incarceration under a subsequently vacated conviction can be used to toll the 10-year limitation for enhanced sentencing of second violent felony offenders under Penal Law § 70.04 (1) (b) (v). Defendant Robert Dozier's 1980 rape and sodomy conviction was vacated due to newly discovered evidence regarding the complainant's psychiatric history, leading to the indictment's dismissal. The People argued that "incarcerated for any reason" should be interpreted literally, applying even to invalid convictions unless deemed unconstitutional. The Court, affirming the Appellate Division, rejected this strict interpretation. It held that the tolling provision does not apply when incarceration results from a "without reason" or flawed conviction that is ultimately dismissed, compelling Dozier's resentencing as a first felony offender.

Second violent felony offenderEnhanced sentencingPenal LawTolling periodIncarcerationVacated convictionNewly discovered evidenceCPL 440.10Statutory interpretationCriminal law
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Santos

This document presents a dissenting opinion by Justice Tom, joined by Justice Nardelli, regarding a defendant's CPL 440.10 motion. The defendant, an inmate, was convicted of second-degree assault on Captain Lanza after an altercation at the Manhattan Detention Center. The motion to vacate the conviction was based on new evidence concerning Lanza's administrative plea agreement for excessive force and false reports during his assignment at Rikers Island in 1996. Justice Tom argues that this new evidence, a minor administrative charge resulting in a forfeiture of vacation days, would not have likely altered the trial's outcome. The dissent emphasizes the strong corroborating testimony of Officer Gonzalez and highlights inconsistencies in the defendant's and inmate witnesses' accounts, concluding there is no sound basis to overturn the conviction.

Criminal LawAssaultCorrection OfficersExcessive ForceInmateCredibilityNew EvidenceCPL 440.10VacaturDissent
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Van Wie

Defendant appealed an order from Herkimer County Court that denied his CPL article 440 motion to vacate a judgment of conviction. He had been convicted upon a guilty plea to insurance fraud in the fifth degree, related to receiving Workers’ Compensation Board benefits. Defendant argued that he was deprived of effective assistance of counsel, who allegedly advised him that he had no defense despite the indictment's lack of merit. The appellate court found defendant's motion to be detailed, well-supported, and uncontested by the People, establishing ineffective assistance of counsel. The court concluded that counsel failed to provide meaningful representation by advising a guilty plea to an unmeritorious charge without proper investigation or legal research. Therefore, the order was unanimously reversed, the judgment of conviction vacated, and the matter remitted to Herkimer County Court for further proceedings.

Ineffective Assistance of CounselCPL Article 440 MotionVacatur of JudgmentInsurance FraudWorkers' Compensation BenefitsGuilty PleaCriminal AppealHerkimer County CourtAppellate DivisionMemorandum Decision
References
4
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 05840
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 19, 2022

Exley v. Cassell Vacation Homes, Inc.

The plaintiff, Bruce Exley, allegedly sustained injuries after falling from a defective ladder while attempting to repair a leak on a roof owned by the defendant, Cassell Vacation Homes, Inc. Exley, who lived rent-free on the property in exchange for maintenance, brought an action against the defendant, citing a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). The Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on liability and denied the defendant's cross-motion to dismiss the complaint. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that the plaintiff successfully demonstrated, prima facie, that the ladder was defective and improperly secured, constituting a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) and a proximate cause of his injuries.

Personal InjuryLadder AccidentElevated Work SiteSummary JudgmentPremises LiabilityLabor Law § 240(1)Proximate CauseSafety DevicesDefective LadderAppellate Review
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Curtis v. Schlegel Manufacturing Corp.

The plaintiff, a former employee, sought $419 in back vacation pay from the defendant, his former employer, under a collective bargaining agreement. The plaintiff initiated a lawsuit in Henrietta Justice Court after being denied recovery through the initial steps of the grievance procedure, but before exhausting the final step of binding arbitration. The Monroe County Court affirmed the lower court's judgment. However, the appellate court determined that the employee failed to exhaust all remedies available under the collective bargaining agreement. Citing legal precedents, the court ruled that an employee must complete the grievance procedure, including arbitration, when the union is willing to pursue the grievance. Consequently, the appellate order unanimously reversed the judgment, vacated the complaint, and dismissed it, without costs.

Vacation Pay DisputeCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievance ProcedureExhaustion of RemediesBinding ArbitrationEmployment LawContractual ObligationAppellate ReviewJudgment ReversalComplaint Dismissal
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 1,797 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