Legal Opinion

People v. Mendez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided August 5, 2002PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The law is well settled that the determination of whether a defendant is fit to stand trial is accorded great deference (see People v Martin, 291 AD2d 459, Iv denied 98 NY2d 653; People v Cox, 196 AD2d 596; People v Childress, 177 AD2d 498, affd 81 NY2d 263; People v Orama, 150 AD2d 505; People v Bolling, *292114 AD2d 416). On this record, contrary to the conclusion of the dissenting Justice, we find that the hearing court (Leavitt, J.), correctly determined that the defendant was competent to stand trial. The testimony of three experts finding the defendant competent was uncontroverted and…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. Dusky v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. People v. ChildressNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. People v. TortoriciNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
  5. People v. FrancabanderaNew York Court of Appeals · 1974

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. MendezNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
  2. People v. GarrasiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  3. People v. AbreuAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  4. Southampton Acres Homeowners Ass'n v. RiddleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API