Legal Opinion

People v. Centeno

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1995PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Harold J. Rothwax, J.

Relying solely on the information contained in the notice portions of the voluntary disclosure form (hereinafter VDF) served at the defendant’s arraignment on the indictment, the defendant moved to preclude, for lack of adequately specific CPL 710.30 notice, the two statements made by the defendant and the identifications made by the complaining witness and by several police officers who witnessed the assault and attempted robbery. If preclusion was not granted, the defendant *174requested Wade and Huntley hearings regarding every statement and…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. People v. WhartonNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. People v. O'DohertyNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. People v. LopezNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
  4. People v. BriggsNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  5. People v. NewballNew York Court of Appeals · 1990

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. Del ValleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  2. People v. BellRochester City Court · 2013
  3. People v. OwensCriminal Court of the City of New York · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API