People v. Sostre
New York Court of Appeals
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
- Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- People v. ThomasNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- People v. EdwardsNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- People v. CavinessNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
3Cited by33 opinions
- Cover v. CohenNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- People v. NortonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- People v. AcombAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- People v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- 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.