Legal Opinion · Concurrence

People v. Davis

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 25, 2011Published

1Concurrence

Chief Judge Lippman

(concurring in Davis and dissenting in McIntosh). Although I join in the majority’s decision to reverse in Davis upon the very narrow ground that Davis was expressly not a target of the first presentation, I part company with the majority as to its disposition in McIntosh, which I believe rests upon a misreading of People v Wilkins (68 NY2d 269 [1986]).

It is not debatable that under Wilkins the crucial consideration in determining whether judicial permission for re-presentation is required pursuant to CPL 190.75 (3) is “the extent to which the Grand Jury considered the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. WilkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. McGinley v. HynesNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  3. People v. GelmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
  4. People v. CredleNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
  5. People v. NelsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1948

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

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

Powered by the Exa API