Legal Opinion
People v. Keene
New York Supreme Court
Decided October 29, 1992PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Arthur J. Cooperman, J.
Once again, a trial court in this State must consider the admissibility of the results of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) typing during the early stages of the identification test’s use in criminal cases.1
*109In this case, defendant is charged with sodomy and other related crimes.
Defendant moved for omnibus relief, which included a request for a hearing pursuant to Frye v United States (293 F 1013), to determine the admissibility of DNA evidence. 2 This court granted the application, and thereafter, in a supplemental order, a hearing was ordered to determine…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- People v. HughesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. CastroNew York Supreme Court · 1989
- State v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Commonwealth v. CurninMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
- Caldwell v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1990
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hayes v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1995
- Dubose v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1995
- State v. QuatrevingtSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1996
- Rivera Pérez v. LeónSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1995
- People v. KeeneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.