Legal Opinion
People v. Kent
New York Court of Appeals
Decided May 8, 2012PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Ciparick, J.
The question presented for our review is whether the evidence proffered at defendant’s trial was legally sufficient to support his convictions for promoting a sexual performance by a child (Penal Law § 263.15) and possessing a sexual performance by a child (Penal Law § 263.16). We must consider, among other issues, the evidentiary significance of “cache files,” or temporary Internet files automatically created and stored on a defendant’s hard drive, and the defendant’s awareness of the presence of such files. We conclude that where the evidence fails to show…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- United States v. Stuart RommCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- United States v. TuckerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. John Charles KuchinskiCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- People v. LaBargeNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- People v. AleynikovNew York Court of Appeals · 2018
- People v. HowardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. TuckerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- State v. LinsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2017
- People v. AleynikovAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.