Legal Opinion

People v. Karpeles

Criminal Court of the City of New York

Decided December 21, 1989PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Michael D. Stallman, J.

This defendant’s discovery motion requires the court to determine an issue of first impression under the recodified criminal discovery statute and raises significant constitutional and evidentiary issues. Does a defendant have an absolute right to demand production and independent testing of blood samples taken from his person? Must movant first demonstrate that such samples or test results would be admissible at trial?

BACKGROUND

Defendant is charged with two concurrent counts of driving while intoxicated. (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [2] [over .10…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. AgursSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Allen v. Crowell-Collier Publishing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1968
  4. People v. KellyNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  5. People v. HauptNew York Court of Appeals · 1988

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Dabbs v. VergariNew York Supreme Court · 1990
  2. People v. Callace, New York County Courts1991
  3. People v. CortezCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1990
  4. People v. Davis, New York County Courts1996
  5. People v. Williamson, New York County Courts1997

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