Legal Opinion
People v. Hood
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 7, 1984PublishedCited by 31 opinions
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendants are not entitled to specific performance of an alleged plea bargain which was never formally entered on the record.
Defendants, Nathaniel Hood and his sister Gwendolyn, were indicted for attempted murder in the first degree, attempted assault in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. In January, 1978, the case was moved to a trial part, and plea negotiations ensued. From his own discussions with counsel the Judge understood, just before the luncheon recess, that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People v. BaldiNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- People v. SelikoffNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. FrederickNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- People v. AikenNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
3Cited by31 opinions
- People v. FloresNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- People v. RamosNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- United States v. United States Currency in the Amount of $228,536.00, Appeal of Edward A. Parker, Claimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- People v. HewlettNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- People v. CarterNew York Supreme Court · 1987
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.