Case law

People v. Riela

14 Misc. 2d 213 · New York County Courts · Oct 15, 1958

The rule is well established that a witness cannot refuse to testify because the immunity afforded does not extend to possible prosecutions in other jurisdictions. … It does give ample protection against the use of such testimony in our own tribunals and it is perfectly well established that this is a sufficient immunity; that all the State is required to or can do is to give immunity

People v. Cook

81 Misc. 2d 235 · New York County Courts · Feb 24, 1975

Having qualified by age, residency, etc. a computer card is completed and placed in the county computer. … Additionally, thousands more have *247 been previously qualified as jurors as a result of the use of other general sources of names.

People v. Pfitzmayer

72 Misc. 2d 739 · New York County Courts · Dec 28, 1972

Clearly, the legislative extension of the time bar in the instant case (CPL 30.10, subd. 3, par. [b]; L. 1970, ch. 996, § 1, eff. … To dismiss an indictment the court must have before it preponderant facts • establishing clear violations of CPL article 190, sufficient to overcome the presumption of regularity which applies to all Grand Jury proceedings

People v. Selikoff

66 Misc. 2d 618 · New York County Courts · Jun 2, 1971

It clearly speaks in singular, not plural, terms. Subdivision 2 of section 255 provides for the attendance of the District Attorney, again singular, when required by the Grand Jury. … With respect to the allegation that the defendants were “targets” of the Grand Jury investigation, and as such, received immunity from prosecution notwithstanding their signing of waivers of immunity (People v.

People v. Scott

124 Misc. 2d 357 · New York County Courts · May 16, 1984

CPL 190.40 focuses particularly on the testimony of a witness before a Grand Jury and clearly states as follows: “1. … This court notes that a high burden is placed on the prosecutor to establish nonresponsiveness (see Matter of Brockway v Monroe, supra, at p 189).

Lockwood v. Village of Buchanan

18 Misc. 2d 862 · New York County Courts · Jan 5, 1959

The limits of this standard have not been clearly established, however, and certain inherent difficulties in the application of the rule are perceptible. … The granting of a permit is clearly a governmental function (Oeters v. City of New York, 270 N. Y. 364, 368 ; cf. Nehrbas v.

In re Reports of Nassau County Grand Jury for April 1975 Term

87 Misc. 2d 453 · New York County Courts · Apr 27, 1976

The presentment is immune. It is like the 'hit and run’ motorist. Before application can be made to suppress it, it is the subject of public gossip. The damage is done. … In Matter of Mullen v Block ( 176 Misc 442, 445 ), the court said: "True, the grand jury may call in to assist them the district attorney or his qualified assistants or the Attorney-General or his qualified assistants, or

People v. Siciliano

185 Misc. 149 · New York County Courts · Jun 25, 1945

and that such a rule ought not be established unless compelled.” … The record upon appeal clearly discloses that the evidence was ample to sustain the guilty verdict.

Murphy v. Incorporated Village of Farmingdale

163 Misc. 221 · New York County Courts · Jun 1, 1937

If the rule urged were adopted, this immunity would gradually disappear. … Beyond that the rule of immunity still applies for it admits of no exception other than that which the Legislature enacts and the immunity is not taken away except by language which is unequivocal and specific in its meaning

People v. Frank

101 Misc. 2d 736 · New York County Courts · Nov 15, 1979

. *737 Defendant waived immunity and testified before the Grand Jury. … Such testimony is clearly inadmissible.

People v. Doe

98 Misc. 2d 805 · New York County Courts · Mar 9, 1979

Thibodeau’s refusal to allow non-subject witnesses to testify or discuss this matter with government investigators without a formal grant of immunity from prosecution’ and that 'such insistance clearly tends to obstruct this … Others may be far more concerned with establishment or extension of legal principles than in the immediate protection of the rights of the lawyer’s individual *814 client.

People v. Dessaure

193 Misc. 381 · New York County Courts · Dec 30, 1946

Indeed, it may be taken as established and it is conceded that such is the case. … The proof adduced is clearly insufficient to give rise to any such inference. Ho prima facie case of discrimination has been established, in fact the evidence points to the contrary.

People v. Grossman

145 Misc. 781 · New York County Courts · Dec 9, 1932

, assuming that immunity has been granted. … and, to establish immunity from conviction of a crime, the offender must bring himself clearly within some provision of law which grants such immunity.”

People v. Avant

69 Misc. 2d 445 · New York County Courts · Dec 27, 1971

The Assistant District Attorney required the defendants to sign a waiver of immunity. … It is now well established by decisions of the United States Supreme Court and our own Court of Appeals that the waiver of a person’s privilege against self incrimination cannot be compelled.

People v. Nation

189 Misc. 2d 165 · New York County Courts · Sep 14, 2001

It seems clear, then, that the People can sustain their burden in two ways: either by establishing they had no access to the immunized statement or “any information derived therefrom,” or by establishing an independent source … , although clearly precautions should be taken — and stringently observed — to prevent such occurrence” (People v Feerick, 241 AD2d 126, 135 ).

People v. Tanner

6 Misc. 2d 1007 · New York County Courts · Jul 25, 1957

Such ingredients must be proven to establish experience. … Y. 321 .) “ Driving ” alone does not so qualify.

Caputo v. Cradle

111 Misc. 2d 242 · New York County Courts · Oct 9, 1981

There is an obvious distinction between the right to qualify for payment for professional therapy treatment and the capability to render a competent, professional opinion as to permanency. … “Permanency” *246 clearly requires the testimony of a doctor who can render a prognosis.

In re Investigation No. 04-730

8 Misc. 3d 238 · New York County Courts · Mar 2, 2005

governmental agencies is firmly established in Anglo-American jurisprudence. … Clearly that “liberty interest” is more fundamental than the privileges which may be conferred and lost by running afoul of state licensing requirements.

People v. Langlois

122 Misc. 2d 1018 · New York County Courts · Feb 14, 1984

Lim clearly establishes that she meets the eligibility criteria outlined above, and the court finds that she is eligible for diplómate certification in psychiatry by the Board. … Lim were not a “qualified psychiatrist”, within the meaning of the law, her qualifications as a medical doctor practicing psychiatry would make her more qualified than even a licensed psychologist to conduct such examination

Connors v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n

49 Misc. 2d 776 · New York County Courts · Mar 7, 1966

Ann’s Home was not established as a “ hospital,” but as a home for aged men and women; that St. … Ann’s Home for the Aged were performed by legally qualified physicians. Whether a facility is called a hospital or not is not germane to the point. I find that St.