SORA Level Lowered on Finding of Improvident Exercise of Discretion
In People v Brewer (2009 NY Slip Op 04548 4th Dept 6/5/09) the Court reduced the defendant’s SORA level from a level three to a level two even though the defendant was presumptively a level three risk pursuant to the risk assessment instrument. The Court ruled that the lower court’s determination was not an “abuse of discretion” it was, under the circumstances, an “improvident exercise of discretion.” The Court explained that that there is...
read morePhoto Arrays and CPL 710.30 Notice
The Court of Appeals held in People v Grajales (8 NY3d 861 [2007]) that the People are not required to give 710.30 notice of identifications of the defendant made during a photo identification procedure, such as an array The Court reasoned that because testimony regarding photographic identification procedures is not admissible, the People cannot “intend to offer at trial” such testimony. Thus, such testimony does not fall within the scope of 710.30. The scope...
read moreWarrant Required for Police to Place a GPS Device on Someone’s Vehicle
By a 4-3 vote, the Court of Appeals held in People v Weaver (5/12/09) that the New York Constitution requires that a warrant issued upon probable cause be issued before the police can monitor someone’s whereabouts by surreptitiously attaching an electronic device (GPS) to that person’s automobile. An excellent summary and analysis of Weaver can be found at New York Court Watcher. A contrary holding would mean that police without warrants or cause could...
read moreCounsel Must Be Very Specific In Denying Police Allegations
Sometimes the lasting parts of a court decision come in the seemingly throwaway lend of the decision in which a court considers one final issue. That seems likely to to be the case with the decision of the the court of Appeals in People v Mattocks (_ NY3d _, 2009 NY Slip Op 03408[4/30/09) a decision which mostly addresses whether creasing a Metrocard to fool the card reader into allowing unpaid swipes constitutes forgery....
read moreWhat is the Remedy When a Prosecutor Insists a Defendant Wear Jail Garb When Testifying Before a Grand Jury?
In People v Buccina (2009 NY Slip Op 03568 [4th Dept 5/1/09])the Appellate Division, Forth Department rejected the contention of defendant that he was denied his right to testify before the grand jury where defendant refused to testify before the grand jury after he was informed that, pursuant to the policy of the jail where he was confined, he would not be allowed to change into street clothes before being transported to the grand...
read more
