People v. Gaskins
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Eiber, J.
In an effort to reduce the trauma suffered by young *274victims of sexual abuse, in 1984 the Legislature enacted CPL 190.32, which permits the prosecutor to present to the Grand Jury a child victim’s videotaped testimony in lieu of his or her live testimony. At the same time, CPL 240.45, which codifies the Rosario rule (see, People v Rosario, 9 NY2d 286), was amended to expressly require the prosecutor to make available to a defendant “an examination videotaped” pursuant to CPL 190.32. The issue on this appeal is whether, in cases such as this where a videotaped…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- People v. RosarioNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
- People v. RanghelleNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- People v. ConsolazioNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- People v. PooleNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- People v. ClarkNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- People v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Flores v. DemskieDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
- People v. EdneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- People v. GellineauNew York Supreme Court · 1998
- People v. HallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.