Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Lewandowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided November 13, 1998Published

1Dissent

Pine J. P., and Boehm, J.

(dissenting). We respectfully dissent. In our view, defendant’s confession was not sufficiently corroborated under CPL 60.50, which provides that “[a] person may not be convicted of any offense solely upon evidence of a confession or admission made by him without additional proof that the offense charged has been committed.” We recognize that the People are not required under CPL 60.50 to present independent evidence of every element of the crime charged (see, People v Chico, 90 NY2d 585, 589-590; People v Murray, 40 NY2d 327, 334, rearg denied 40 NY2d 1080, cert…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. DanielsNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. People v. ChicoNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
  3. People v. MurrayNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. People v. BoodenNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  5. People v. WhitneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984

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