Legal Opinion
State v. Charada T.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided May 8, 2014PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Abdus-Salaam, J.
We hold that, in this Mental Hygiene Law article 10 proceeding, Supreme Court erred by permitting an expert witness to *358introduce hearsay testimony about a crime respondent Charada T. was never charged with committing, but that this error was harmless under the circumstances.
Respondent Charada T. has been convicted of committing three violent sex offenses, two of which occurred within the span of an hour. Close to midnight on September 16, 1997, respondent attacked a woman on the street in Manhattan by choking her until she lost consciousness, striking her…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. Floyd Y.New York Court of Appeals · 2013
- State v. John S.New York Court of Appeals · 2014
- Harvey v. Mazal American PartnersNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- State v. Mark S.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. FordNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- State v. ParrottAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Matter of State of New York v. Abdul A.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- State v. BreedenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Matter of State of New York v. Benjamin M.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Matter of State of New York v. Francisco R.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.