Legal Opinion

People v. Sostre

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 18, 1980PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

*960We cannot say as a matter of law that defendant should have been permitted to introduce hearsay evidence of certain exculpatory statements he made at the scene of the crime. The trial court refused to receive these statements as “spontaneous” or “excited” utterances, and the Appellate Division agreed with this ruling, noting that the statements had been made approximately five minutes after defendant had been shot by the victim and at a time when defendant had had an adequate opportunity to reflect upon his…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. People v. ThomasNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  3. People v. EdwardsNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  4. People v. CavinessNew York Court of Appeals · 1975

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Cover v. CohenNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. People v. NortonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  3. People v. AcombAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
  4. People v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  5. People v. MatosAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985

28 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