People v. A. J. Rutledge
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in refusing to give an expanded circumstantial evidence charge. We disagree. Upon hearing a radio transmission that the proceeds of a burglary had been found in the trunk of his car, defendant stated that he had committed “a burglary.” That statement, “if interpreted by the fact finder as a relevant admission of guilt, distinguishes this case from those based exclusively on circumstantial evidence” (People v Rumble, 45 NY2d 879, 880), and thus an expanded circumstantial evidence charge was not required…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- People v. SavageNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- People v. CefaroNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
- People v. RumbleNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- People v. SpinelliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- People v. ThomasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- People v. DesmondAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. MonroeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Norwood v. ArtisDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2007
- People v. BellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. HamptonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.