People v. Bennett
Cases that cite this one
35 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- People v. Bowman (Webster Justice Court 2024)
- People v. Olds (New York Supreme Court 1988)
- People v. Williams (Kings Criminal Court 2024)
- ARROYO, CARLOS J., PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- People v. Arroyo (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- People v. Arroyo (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Matter of S.S. (Nassau Family Court 2007)
- People v. Velazquez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
- People v. Steisi (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
- People v. Steisi (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
- People v. Moore (New York County Courts 1998)
- People v. Torres (New York Supreme Court 1997)
- People v. Bowman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
- People v. Reid (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
- People v. Springer (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
- People v. Lopez (N.Y. 1994)
- In re Deborah L. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
- People v. Lucas (Suffolk County District Court 1994)
- People v. Gilman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
- People v. Noto (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
- People v. Dempsey (Criminal Court of the City of New York 1992)
- People v. Cooper (N.Y. 1991)
- People v. Dyla (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- People v. Holmes (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- People v. Cooper (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
At the arraignment, defendant was provided with written notice that the People intended to offer as evidence at trial both a written and an oral statement. (See CPL 710.30, subd 1.) Thereafter, the People agreed to provide defendant with a copy of the written confession. Defendant also was informed that the “sum and substance” of his oral statement was contained in that writing.
The trial court found that the oral admission was substantially the same as the written confession, and that finding was affirmed by the Appellate Division. There being no basis in the record to disturb the conclusion of both courts below that the oral statement was substantially the same as the written one, we cannot say, as a matter of law, that the People failed to comply with the requirements of CPL 710.30.
We have considered defendant’s remaining contention and have found it to be without merit.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.