Legal Opinion

People v. Diaz

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 8, 2010No. 97PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Graffeo, J.

The primary issue in this case is whether a defendant seeking to raise an extreme emotional disturbance defense is required to provide notice pursuant to CPL 250.10 if the intent is to rely solely on lay testimony to prove the affirmative defense. We left this question open in People v Smith (1 NY3d 610 [2004]) and now conclude that CPL 250.10’s procedures apply under these circumstances.

On June 4, 2000, about three weeks after defendant Teofilo Diaz had completed a prison term for an assault on Felipa Santana, his former girlfriend, he went to Santana’s…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People v. CrimminsNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. People v. RocheNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
  3. People v. BerkNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
  4. People v. AlmonorNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
  5. People v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 2004

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. People v. SilburnCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 2018
  2. The People v. Anthony v. PavoneNew York Court of Appeals · 2015
  3. People v. GuayNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. People v. GonzalezNew York Court of Appeals · 2014
  5. People v. LyonsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021

35 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