Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People of the State of New York v. Kevin Mosley

December 30, 2009

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
v.
KEVIN MOSLEY, DEFENDANT APPELLANT.



Appeal from Judgment of Ontario County Court, Frederick G. Reed, J. - Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree).

CALENDAR NO. (1132/08)

Appeal dismissed upon stipulation.

PRESENT: HURLBUTT, J.P., SMITH, CENTRA, GREEN, AND PINE, JJ.

MOTION NO. (283/01)

KA 98-05448.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. GREGORY HILL, DEFENDANT APPELLANT.

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, GREEN, AND PINE, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.)

MOTION NO. (366/01)

KA 99-05013.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. DERRIC W. CLARK, DEFENDANT APPELLANT.

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., HURLBUTT, GREEN, AND GORSKI, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.)

MOTION NO. (1659/01)

KA 99-05058.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, v. THOMAS MCFADDEN,

DEFENDANT APPELLANT.

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., HURLBUTT, PINE, AND GORSKI, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.) MOTION NO. (1468/03)

KA 00-02533.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. CLARENCE PRUDE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

(APPEAL NO. 1.) -

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.

PRESENT: HURLBUTT, J.P., CENTRA, PINE, AND GORSKI, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.)

MOTION NO. (29/06)

KA 04-00047.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. DEXTER MASTOWSKI, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. -

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., HURLBUTT, GREEN, AND GORSKI, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.)

MOTION NO. (185/06)

KA 04-02750.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. JAMES W. MADILL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., GREEN, PINE, AND GORSKI, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.)

MOTION NO. (445/06)

KA 05-00193.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. RICHARD F. MILLS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.

PRESENT: HURLBUTT, J.P., SMITH, GREEN, AND PINE, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.)

MOTION NO. (646/07)

KA 04-01772.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. ADOLPH WRIGHT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., HURLBUTT, GREEN, AND PINE, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.)

MOTION NO. (1104/07)

KA 05-02034.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. JERRY L. JOHNSON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CENTRA, FAHEY, GREEN, AND GORSKI, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.)

MOTION NO. (1125/07)

KA 06-01069.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. SHAWN E. AKIN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Motion for reargument or, in the alternative, leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., HURLBUTT, FAHEY, GREEN, AND PINE, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.)

MOTION NO. (27/08)

KA 04-02128.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. ANDREW FIGGINS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Motion for writ of error coram nobis dismissed.

PRESENT: HURLBUTT, J.P., SMITH, PERADOTTO, AND GREEN, JJ.

(Filed Dec. 30, 2009.)

MOTION NO. (1203/08)

KA 07-02291.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. DAVID C. WILLIAMS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Motion for writ of error coram nobis granted.

Memorandum:

Defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of appellate counsel because counsel failed to raise issues on direct appeal that would have resulted in reversal, specifically, in failing to argue that the warrantless search of defendant's residence and property was unlawful and that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to seek a remedy for an alleged Rosario violation.

Upon our review of the trial court proceedings, we conclude that the issues may have merit. Therefore, the order of October 10, 2008 is vacated and this Court will consider the appeal de novo (see People v LeFrois, 151 AD2d 1046). Defendant ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.