Legal Opinion
People v. Porto
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 21, 2010No. 219, 220PublishedCited by 340 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Jones, J.
The common issue presented in these appeals is whether defendants’ motions to substitute counsel were properly denied in light of the “minimal inquiry” standard of People v Sides (75 NY2d 822 [1990]). Finding no reversible error, we affirm both convictions.
People v Porto
On July 24, 2006, complainant Sai Hung Chui returned to his apartment to find that he had been the victim of a burglary. The police recovered a fingerprint from a metal cookie tin that had been displaced during the crime and determined that it belonged to defendant William Porto. Subsequently,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. SidesNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- People v. SawyerNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- People v. LinaresNew York Court of Appeals · 2004
- People v. BeriguetteNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- People v. StevensonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by340 opinions
- People v. AdgerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. MorrisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. WoodardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. JonesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. LewickiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
335 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.