Legal Opinion

People v. Gilligan

New York Court of Appeals

Decided April 27, 1976PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and a new trial ordered.

It was error for the trial court to deny defense counsel’s request to inspect, for possible use on cross-examination, the written notes and reports made by the several police officers in the course of their investigation (People v Persico, 24 NY2d 758; People v Malinsky, 15 NY2d 86, 90-91; People v Rosario, 9 NY2d 286; see Jencks v United States, 353 US 657; cf. CPL art 240). Reliance on the in camera finding that the material had "nothing in it exculpatory to the defendant” was not in accord with our…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Jencks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. People v. RosarioNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
  3. People v. MalinskyNew York Court of Appeals · 1965
  4. People v. HawaNew York Court of Appeals · 1963
  5. People v. HawaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. People v. RanghelleNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. People v. PooleNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. People v. WallaceNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. People v. WashingtonNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
  5. People v. ParanzinoNew York Court of Appeals · 1976

14 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