People v. Rios
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The only evidence concerning the informant was that she observed defendant walking with the child and gave the police defendant’s name and address. In light of the marginal nature of the information provided, defendant was not entitled to disclosure of the informant’s identity “absent an extremely strong showing of relevance” (People v Goggins, 34 NY2d 163,170). Although defendant submitted questions to be asked of the informant at the Darden:* hearing which could have disclosed exculpatory information to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. DardenNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. GogginsNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. CassidyNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- People v. . SeppiNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
- People v. SangaminoNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
3Cited by20 opinions
- The People v.Raymond DensonNew York Court of Appeals · 2015
- People v. SalimiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- People v. PellotAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- People v. CruzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Alam v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1989
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.