Legal Opinion
Washpon v. New York State District Attorney
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 13, 1995PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Julius Vinik, J.
Defendant Samuel Washpon instituted a CPLR article 78 proceeding against the Kings County District. Attorney to compel blood group and DNA testing of the semen found on the jumpsuit and vaginal swab of a 1984 rape victim. As a CPLR article 78 proceeding is the incorrect section (see, Matter of Gold v Gartenstein, 54 NY2d 627), the court converted the proceeding to a motion to vacate judgment under CPL article 440. Both parties have been given an opportunity to address arguments under CPL article 440.
Defendant was convicted by a jury of rape in the first…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Weatherford v. BurseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- People v. CopicottoNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Miller v. SchwartzNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- People v. McNamaraNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Hynes v. CiriglianoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- People v. De OliveiraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- People v. AhlersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- People v. KellarAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- People v. BarnwellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- People v. LoganAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.