Legal Opinion
People v. Coaxum
New York Supreme Court
Decided October 29, 1984PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Jerome L. Reinstein, J.
New York’s “rich development” (People v Blake, 35 NY2d 331, 338) of the right to counsel under our State’s Constitution is now too well known and documented to require repetition. (See, e.g., People v Donovan, 13 NY2d 148; People v Arthur, 22 NY2d 325; People v Hobson, 39 NY2d 479; People v Rogers, 48 NY2d 167; People v Cunningham, 49 NY2d 203; People v Skinner, 52 NY2d 24; People v Kazmarick, 52 NY2d 322; People v Bartolomeo, 53 NY2d 225; but cf. People v Middleton, 54 NY2d 474; People v Ferrara, 54 NY2d 498; People v Mealer, 57 NY2d 214; People v…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Kirby v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Brewer v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Hoffa v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- People v. HobsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- People v. RogersNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Powell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1988
- Dynamic Chemicals, Inc. v. Ackerman Mechanical Services, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008