Significant Cases

CAL has been a frequent presence in the New York Court of Appeals since our doors opened.  Our victories in that important court span the spectrum of criminal law, from jury selection to the court's closing charge, from grand jury proceedings to sentencing.  We litigate for our client, but the decisions in our cases often impact the lives of many individuals and determine the outcomes of many other cases.  Below is a non-comprehensive catalog of some of our signficant cases. 

People v. Paulin, 17 N.Y.3d 238 (2011)(parole violators are eligible for resentencing under the 2009 Drug Law Reform Act).

People v. Santiago,  17 N.Y.3d 246 (2011)(individuals who apply for drug law resentencing while in state custody remain eligible for resentencing even if later released to parole).  

People v. Williams, 14 N.Y.3d 198 (2010)(Double Jeopardy bars the imposition of post-release supervision after completion of sentence).

People v. Sparber, 10 N.Y.3d 457 (2008)(sentencing court must pronounce the term of post-release supervision in imposing sentence).

People v. Hall, 10 N.Y.3d 303 (2008)(requiring police to obtain a search warrant before conducting a body cavity search for evidence at the precinct). 

People v. Pasley, 9 N.Y.3d 342 (2007)(court conducting weight of the evidence review must consider the elements of the crime even if the defendant failed to preserve a challenge to legal sufficiency).  

People v. LeGrand, 8 N.Y.3d 449 (2007)(abuse of discretion for a court to exclude relevant expert testimony on the reliability of eyewitness identifications where little or no corrborating evidence connects the defendant to the crime).

People v. Boyer, 6 N.Y.3d 427 (2006)(refusing to extend the "confirmatory identification" exception to CPL §710.30's notice requirement where the officer's initial viewing was fleeting and unreliable).  

People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248 (2006)(valid waiver of right to appeal must be supported by record evidence establishing the defendant's understanding that the right to appeal is separate and distinct from those rights automatically forfieted by a guilty plea).  

People v. Suarez, 6 N.Y.3d 202 (2005)(clarifying standard for depraved indifference murder).

People v. Williams, 5 N.Y.3d 7323 (2005)(in buy and bust case, upholding the defendant's right to a jury charge that the jury can consider evidence or lack of evidence).

People v. Nazario, 4 N.Y.3d 70 (2005)(violation of defendant's public trial right where the court closed the courtroom to the defendant's drug counselor despite the absence of any showing that the counselor's presence would jeopardize the undercovers' safety).  

People v. Edwards, 95 N.Y.2d 480 (2000)(error for court to refuse to allow defense counsel to cross-examine the investigating police officer about the confidential informant's identity, and then to rely on information provided by the confidential informant without examining him in camera).

People v. Johnson, 94 N.Y.2d 600 (2000)(error to deny a defense challenge for cause where a prospective juror expresses doubt as to impartiality and fails to provide unequivocal assurances of an ability to set aside any predisposition and decide the case fairly).