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

People v. Linzy

The case involves an appeal against a conviction for rape in the first degree, focusing on the sufficiency of corroborating evidence and the adequacy of jury instructions. The appellant contended that the complainant's testimony lacked sufficient corroboration of identity and that the trial court erred in its charge regarding exhibits as corroboration. The majority affirmed the conviction, finding ample corroboration from the complainant's observations and identification, supported by physical evidence. However, the dissenting judges argued that the corroborative evidence was weak and the confusing jury charge on corroboration led to a speculative verdict, necessitating a new trial.

Rape (First Degree)CorroborationJury InstructionsCriminal AppealWitness IdentificationPhysical EvidencePenal LawDue ProcessAppellate ReviewTrial Court Error
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Nicole G.

The Rockland County Department of Social Services appealed two Family Court orders concerning child protective proceedings against Nicole G. and Daniella G., which had denied petitions and dismissed the proceedings. The appeal affirmed the Family Court's decision, finding that Nicole G.'s out-of-court statements regarding her father's alleged abuse were insufficiently corroborated by other evidence. Although witnesses cross-corroborated each other's testimony and Nicole G. provided a narrative, she refused to testify. An expert witness also failed to provide the necessary corroborating evidence with a reasonable degree of certainty. Consequently, the allegations of abuse were not established by a preponderance of the evidence.

Child Protective ProceedingsFamily Court Act Article 10Child AbuseChild NeglectCorroboration of StatementsOut-of-Court StatementsCredibility of WitnessesFact-Finding HearingAdmissibility of EvidenceExpert Testimony
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 16, 1982

People v. Nieto

This case involves an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, convicting him of robbery in the second degree. The core issue on appeal was whether the People presented sufficient evidence to corroborate the testimony of two accomplices, Anastasio Santiago and Julio Perez, who planned and executed the robbery with the defendant. The defendant allegedly informed the accomplices about the victim's valuable jewelry and suggested a time for the robbery. The court found that the evidence relied upon by the People, including the defendant's presence at the job site, association with accomplices, a statement about the robbery time, the victim's phone call testimony, and a police detective's rebuttal testimony, did not satisfy the statutory requirements for independent corroboration under CPL 60.22. The corroborative evidence, at best, only supported the accomplices' credibility but failed to connect the defendant with the crime. Consequently, the judgment was reversed, and the indictment was dismissed.

Accomplice TestimonyCorroboration EvidenceRobbery Second DegreeSufficiency of EvidenceIndictment DismissedAppellate ReviewCriminal Procedure LawImpeachment EvidenceIndependent CorroborationWitness Credibility
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Nicole S.

This neglect proceeding under Article 10 of the Family Court Act addresses the corroboration required for a child’s unsworn, out-of-court statements. The petitioner alleged respondent Steven S. physically injured his four-year-old child, presenting evidence solely through caseworkers' testimony recounting the child's statements and observations of injuries. The court found that while independent evidence confirmed injuries, there was no corroboration regarding the perpetrator's identity or the manner of injury, independent of the child’s hearsay statements. Applying the corroboration standard from criminal and juvenile delinquency cases, which mandates corroboration for all material elements, the court determined the petitioner failed to satisfy this burden. Consequently, the petition against Steven S. was dismissed.

Child NeglectFamily Court ActCorroboration RequirementUnsworn Child StatementHearsay ExceptionPhysical InjuryAbuse or Neglect ProceedingSufficiency of EvidenceDue Process ConsiderationsCriminal Procedure Law Standards
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rodriguez v. Greiner

The petitioner, Robinson Rodriguez, sought a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his 1998 New York State Supreme Court conviction for first-degree sodomy. He argued that his due process rights were violated due to insufficient corroboration of the victim's unsworn testimony and overall insufficient evidence. The court, presided over by District Judge Gershon, reviewed the evidence presented at trial, including medical testimony, prompt outcry evidence, and the petitioner's statements to the police. Ultimately, the court concluded that the victim's unsworn testimony was sufficiently corroborated and that a rational trier of fact could have found the petitioner guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Consequently, the petition was denied, and a certificate of appealability was also denied.

Habeas CorpusSodomyChild Sexual AbuseSufficiency of EvidenceCorroborationUnsworn TestimonyAutistic VictimDue ProcessFederal PetitionState Conviction
References
15
Case No. 106274
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 30, 2014

PeoplevRodriguez

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the judgment convicting Jose A. Rodriguez of operating as a major trafficker and four counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. Rodriguez appealed, arguing insufficient evidence, particularly regarding the corroboration of accomplice testimony, and an excessive sentence. The Court found adequate corroboration for accomplice testimony connecting Rodriguez to the drug operation through police investigations and controlled buys. It also dismissed his claims concerning geographical jurisdiction and ineffective assistance of counsel. The Appellate Division concluded that the evidence was legally sufficient and the verdict was in line with the weight of the evidence, and determined that the sentence imposed was not unduly harsh or excessive, citing the serious nature of the crimes and Rodriguez's criminal history.

Criminal LawDrug TraffickingControlled SubstancesAccomplice TestimonyEvidence CorroborationAppellate ReviewSentence AppealPenal LawNew York LawDrug Law Reform Act
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Danielle M.

The Family Court, Bronx County, dismissed a neglect petition against respondent Almanie M., concerning her daughter Danielle M. The petition, filed by the Department of Social Services, alleged neglect due to the mother's refusal to allow caseworkers access to Danielle, and Danielle's subsequent accounts of physical abuse, fear of her mother, and exposure to bizarre behavior related to the mother's belief in a conspiracy. The Family Court found insufficient corroborating evidence for excessive corporal punishment and no medical/psychiatric evidence for emotional impairment. The appellate court reversed the dismissal, reinstated the petition, and remanded the matter for a dispositional hearing. The appellate court held that the issue was the "substantial risk" of impairment, not solely physical abuse or formal diagnosis, and that the child's sworn testimony, corroborated by out-of-court statements, was sufficient evidence of neglect.

Neglect PetitionChild NeglectEmotional ImpairmentPhysical ImpairmentCorporal PunishmentChild TestimonyHearsay EvidenceCorroborationFamily Court ActDue Process
References
8
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 06597 [222 AD3d 560]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 2023

Matter of L.V.M. (Simon S.)

The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed the Family Court's finding that the subject children, L.V.M. and M.D.M., are abused children. The court found that the preponderance of evidence supported the abuse findings, determining the children's out-of-court statements were reliable and corroborated. Both children described similar patterns of sexual abuse by their stepfather, which were cross-corroborated by each other's accounts and other evidence, including parental admissions. The court rejected arguments regarding alleged motives for the children to lie and issues with translation or a nonexpert's testimony on demeanor, upholding the Family Court's credibility determinations.

Child AbuseSexual AbuseCorroboration of Child StatementsFamily Court ActAppellate ReviewCredibility DeterminationsOut-of-court StatementsParental ConductStepfather AbuseChild Protective Services
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Chianti FF.

This case concerns an appeal from a Family Court order in Chemung County, which adjudicated Benjamin GG., Jr. and Chianti FF. as abused and neglected children. Respondent Benjamin GG. appealed, challenging the corroboration of Chianti's hearsay statements alleging sexual abuse by him. The appellate court found sufficient evidence for corroboration, citing testimony from a senior caseworker using anatomically correct dolls and expert testimony on behavioral patterns. Additionally, the court determined there was ample evidence for physical abuse of Benjamin, Jr., based on Benjamin's admissions, and general neglect of both children. The Family Court's order was subsequently affirmed by the appellate panel.

Child AbuseChild NeglectSexual Abuse AllegationsCorroboration of HearsayExpert Witness TestimonyFamily Court ActAppellate ReviewSufficiency of EvidenceParental ResponsibilityChild Welfare
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 15, 1985

In re Kimberly K.

This case concerns an appeal in a child protective proceeding from an order of disposition by the Family Court, Queens County, which dismissed the petition. The Family Court's decision was based on the petitioner's failure to corroborate the child's out-of-court assertions of abuse, specifically regarding the identity of the abuser. The Appellate Court reversed this order, clarifying that corroborative evidence as to the abuser's identity is not a requirement under Family Court Act § 1046 (a) (vi). It found that the child's out-of-court statements, supported by medical evidence of an enlarged entroitus and a social worker's expert conclusion of abuse, were sufficient to establish a prima facie case. Consequently, the proceeding was remitted to the Family Court for a new fact-finding hearing and determination.

Child ProtectiveFamily LawAppealCorroborationChild AbusePrima FacieMedical EvidenceSocial WorkerRemandAppellate Division
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 10,521 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