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
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
Mar 21, 1961

People v. Meadows

This is an appeal by a defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County, rendered March 21, 1961, convicting her of grand larceny in the second degree, forgery in the third degree, misappropriation of funds by a public officer, and obtaining proceeds of a fraudulent audit. The defendant, a case worker for the Welfare Department of the City of Poughkeepsie, was indicted on 68 counts for fraudulently causing checks to be issued to welfare recipients and then converting the proceeds. Recipients testified they either cashed checks and gave proceeds to the defendant or endorsed checks in blank and gave them to her. The defendant claimed the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, that corroborating testimony was improperly admitted, and that there was an erroneous jury charge. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding the record sustained the verdict, the challenged testimony was properly received, and any assumed error in the charge did not prejudice the defendant.

Grand LarcenyForgeryMisappropriation of FundsPublic Officer MisconductFraudulent AuditWelfare FraudCriminal AppealJury TrialSufficiency of EvidenceEvidentiary Ruling
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Montesa

The defendant appealed a judgment convicting her of assault, reckless endangerment, and endangering a child, as well as an order denying her motion to vacate the judgment. The central issue was the admission of hearsay testimony from Dr. Cicatello and Dr. Janvier, which described the child's account of events differing from the defendant's. The court found that this combined testimony, along with the prosecutor's summation remarks, deprived the defendant of a fair trial. Consequently, the judgment was reversed, and a new trial was ordered, with the appeal from the order being dismissed as academic.

Criminal LawChild AbuseHearsayFair TrialExpert TestimonyReckless EndangermentAssaultEvidence SufficiencyAppellate ReviewReversal
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 10, 1992

People v. Lemma

The defendant appealed a judgment from the Supreme Court, Queens County, convicting him of grand larceny in the fourth degree. The appeal challenged the admission of a gas station attendant's testimony regarding the defendant's demand for money prior to the actual theft. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, holding that the testimony was properly admitted because it was necessary to complete the narrative of events leading up to the crime and was inextricably interwoven with the description of the events depicted. The defendant's remaining contentions were found to be either unpreserved or without merit.

Grand LarcenyCriminal AppealAdmissibility of EvidenceTestimonyComplete NarrativeInterwoven EventsAppellate ReviewJury Verdict
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Pond

Defendant appealed a judgment convicting him of sodomy, sexual abuse, and endangering the welfare of a child. The primary contention was that his confession should have been suppressed due to limited mental capacity and alleged police coercion. The court found that despite the defendant's mild retardation, he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his Miranda rights, citing his prior experience with the criminal justice system. Additionally, the court acknowledged the improper admission of hearsay testimony as bolstering but deemed it harmless error due to overwhelming other evidence, including the victim's testimony and the defendant's confession. Consequently, the judgment was affirmed.

SodomySexual AbuseEndangering Welfare of a ChildMiranda RightsConfession VoluntarinessMental CapacityHearsay TestimonyBolstering ErrorHarmless ErrorCriminal Justice System
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Orse

The defendant appealed a conviction for robbery in the first degree from the Supreme Court, Queens County. The appellate court found two significant errors during the trial: the improper admission of rebuttal testimony solely to impeach the credibility of the main alibi witness on a collateral issue, and the erroneous admission of bolstering identification testimony from the arresting officer. Additionally, the jury instructions were flawed as they seemed to shift the burden of proving alibi to the defendant and lacked a similar scrutiny admonition for identification testimony. Considering the tenuous nature of the identification evidence and these cumulative errors, the judgment was reversed, and a new trial was ordered in the interest of justice.

Criminal ProcedureEvidentiary ErrorsWitness CredibilityAppellate ReviewIdentification TestimonyAlibi DefenseJury Charge ErrorReversible ErrorDiscretionary ReversalInterest of Justice
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Painter

This case involves an appeal by a defendant convicted of rape, sexual abuse, and endangering the welfare of a child, and a cross-appeal by the People regarding an order setting aside a conviction for aggravated sexual abuse in the second degree. The Supreme Court initially granted the defendant's motion to set aside the aggravated sexual abuse conviction, citing insufficient evidence. However, the appellate court disagreed, affirming the original judgment of conviction and reversing the order that had set aside the aggravated sexual abuse verdict, thereby reinstating that conviction. The court found that the evidence, including medical testimony and the defendant's confession, was legally sufficient to establish guilt. While an error in admitting certain testimony was noted, it was deemed harmless due to the overwhelming proof against the defendant.

RapeSexual AbuseChild EndangermentAggravated Sexual AbuseJury VerdictLegal Sufficiency of EvidenceHarmless ErrorImproper Bolstering TestimonyDefendant's ConfessionAppellate Review
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. McKinley

The case involves a defendant convicted of second-degree murder, first-degree assault, and criminal possession of a weapon after stabbing his parents, killing his father, and injuring his mother. The defendant appealed the conviction, primarily asserting an insanity defense and challenging several evidentiary rulings. The court upheld the striking of a psychiatrist's testimony due to the doctor's unfamiliarity with the New York legal standard for criminal responsibility. Additionally, the court found no error in excluding a therapist's testimony as an expert or certain forensic mental health file contents, nor in excluding an outdated psychiatric diagnosis from 1970. The judgment was unanimously affirmed, citing overwhelming evidence of guilt and harmless error even if certain testimony had been admitted.

Criminal ResponsibilityInsanity DefensePsychiatric TestimonyEvidentiary RulingsHearsayExpert Witness QualificationParanoid SchizophreniaSchizoid Personality DisorderCriminal Possession of WeaponMurder Second Degree
References
16
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

People v. Mercado

The defendant appealed a judgment from the County Court of Washington County, convicting them of multiple counts of sodomy in the first degree and endangering the welfare of a child. The charges stemmed from allegations made by the defendant's stepchildren. The appellate court found that while the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence, the defendant was deprived of a fair trial due to the improper admission of expert testimony from a social worker. This testimony impermissibly compared the children's behavior to general characteristics of sexual abuse victims. Additionally, evidence concerning the 'sexual climate' of the household was deemed inadmissible as it sought to prove the defendant's predisposition to commit the crimes. Consequently, the judgment was reversed, and the matter was remitted for a new trial.

Sodomy First DegreeEndangering Welfare of a ChildAppellate ReviewExpert Witness TestimonyAdmissibility of EvidenceRape Trauma SyndromeAbused Child SyndromePropensity EvidencePrejudicial ErrorFair Trial
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 17,254 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