Legal Opinion
People v. Dr. Roe
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 16, 1995PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Phylis Skloot Bamberger, J.
The issue in this case is whether various documents should, pursuant to CPL 160.50 (1), remain unsealed after dismissal of the charges against defendant. The People’s motion to keep certain documents unsealed is granted.
1. Prior Proceedings
The defendant was indicted for grand larceny in the second degree and conspiracy in the first degree. Fazal Shah was also indicted and is a fugitive. The charges arose from an alleged scheme that defrauded the New York State Medicaid system of over $500,000. The theory of the People’s case was that the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hynes v. KarassikNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- People v. PattersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- In re of DondiNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Costello v. GeiserNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- Abrams v. SkolnikAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Pritzker v. City of HudsonDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1998
- People v. McGurkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- People v. CanalesNew York Supreme Court · 1997