People v. Cooke
Cases that cite this one
24 later published cases cite this decision.
- The People v. Daniel Bradford (N.Y. 2023)
- The People v. Perry C. Griggs (N.Y. 2016)
- People v. Farrell (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- People v. Garcia (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- People v. Bradford (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- People v. Turner (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- People v. Ortiz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- People v. Daniel A. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- People v. Head (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- People v. Hanniford (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- People v. Osman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- People v. Pressley (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- DOLAN, JR., WILLIAM J., PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- GONYEAU, JR., RONALD, PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- People v. Dolan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- People v. Dolan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- People v. Gonyeau (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- People v. Gonyeau (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- RICHARDSON, JAMES O., PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- HARRISON, JAMIE C., PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- People v. Richardson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- People v. Richardson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- People v. Harrison (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- People v. Harrison (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
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
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The trial court’s failure to make a finding of necessity for the stun belt’s use does not constitute an unwaivable mode of proceedings error (see People v Buchanan, 13 NY3d 1, 4 [2009]; see generally People v Hanley, 20 NY3d 601, 604 [2013]; People v Schrock, 108 AD3d 1221, 1224-1225 [4th Dept 2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 998 [2013], denied reconsideration 23 NY3d 1025 [2014]; see also People v Gamble, 18 NY3d 386, 396-397 [2012], rearg denied 19 NY3d 833 [2012]). Thus, as defendant never objected, and indeed expressly consented to wearing a stun belt at trial, he waived his contention that he was denied a fair trial on the ground that he was restrained by means of that security device (see People v Iannone, 45 NY2d 589, 600 [1978]; cf. Buchanan, 13 NY3d at 3). We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, in a memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.