Legal Opinion
People v. Rodriguez
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 17, 2012PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant’s contention that the testimony of the People’s expert concerning child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome impermissibly bolstered the testimony of the complaining witnesses is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Carfora, 69 AD3d 751 [2010]; People v Staropoli, 49 AD3d 568 [2008]; People v Hendrickson, 34 AD3d 495 [2006]; People v Clarke, 7 AD3d 537 [2004]; People v Negrette, 218 AD2d 751 [1995]; People v Califano, 216 AD2d 574 [1995]; cf. People v Diaz, 85 AD3d 1047 [2011]) and, in any event, is without merit (see People v Spicola, 16 NY3d 441 [2011], cert denied…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- People v. CrimminsNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. HustonNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- People v. CarrollNew York Court of Appeals · 2000
- People v. SpicolaNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
- Noble v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- People v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. PapasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- People v. YoungAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. PapasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- People v. YoungAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014