Coakley v. State
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Claimant established entitlement to relief under the Unjust Conviction and Imprisonment Act of 1984 (Court of Claims Act § 8-b) by clear and convincing evidence, in particular, the post-conviction serological testing which confirmed that the semen found on the rape victim’s underwear was not his.
The statute mandates that claimant’s conviction be reversed *478or vacated on certain specified grounds, one of which is newly-discovered evidence under CPL 440.10 (Court of Claims Act § 8-b [5] [b] [ii]). Since claimant’s conviction was explicitly vacated by the trial court on this ground, the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Papa v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Ivey v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- Dozier v. State of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Ferrer v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1987
- Ferrer v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Britt v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Harris v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Rogers v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1999
- Mike v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 2005
- Kotler v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.