Legal Opinion
People v. Cotto
New York Court of Appeals
Decided July 1, 1998PublishedCited by 128 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*72OPINION OF THE COURT
Chief Judge Kaye.
Whenever the People allege specific facts which demonstrate a “distinct possibility” that a criminal defendant has engaged in witness tampering, the court must grant a Sirois hearing to test the validity of that claim (see, Matter of Holtzman v Hellenbrand, 92 AD2d 405, 415; see also, People v Geraci, 85 NY2d 359). Defendant challenges his conviction for second degree murder and related crimes primarily on the ground that the trial court’s ruling after a Sirois hearing was flawed in several *73respects. Perceiving no error warranting a new trial, we affirm…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. EdwardsNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- United States v. David Thai, Lan Ngoc Tran, Minh Do, Jimmy Nguyen, Hoang Huy Ngo, Quang Van Nguyen, and Lv Hong, A/K/A "l.v. Hong"Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- People v. VasquezNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- People v. GeraciNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- People v. BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by128 opinions
- Richard Cotto v. Victor Herbert, Warden, Attica Correctional FacilityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
- People v. JohnsonNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
- Sammy Geraci v. Daniel Senkowski, Supt.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- Marcus Mungo v. George DuncanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
- People v. MoscatCriminal Court of the City of New York · 2004
123 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.