People v. Satloff

N.Y.

Court: New York Court of Appeals

Citations: 56 N.Y.2d 745, 452 N.Y.S.2d 12, 437 N.E.2d 271, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3399

Decision Date: 5/13/1982

Jurisdiction: NY

Bluebook Citation: People v. Satloff, 56 N.Y.2d 745, 452 N.Y.S.2d 12, 437 N.E.2d 271, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3399 (1982)

More Cases: N.Y. decisions from 1982

Citation analytics

How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

★Landmark AuthorityTop 1% most-cited · cited by 199 decisions

199

Citing decisions

Authorities cited

Courts citing

Citations by decade

1980s1990s2000s2010s2020s

Courts citing this case

N.Y. App. Div.187

N.Y. App. Term.3

N.Y. Sup. Ct.3

Fulton City Ct.1

Md.1

Md. App. Ct.1

Most recently cited by10

2025People v. Vega N.Y. App. Div.
2023People v. Colvin N.Y. App. Div.
2022People v. File N.Y. App. Div.
2022People v. Leigh N.Y. App. Div.
2021People v. Walker N.Y. App. Div.
2021People v. Lockett (Richard) N.Y. App. Term.
2020People v. Taylor N.Y. App. Div.
2018People v. Zamfino N.Y. App. Div.
2018People v. Brown N.Y. App. Div.
2017People v. McCalmon N.Y. App. Div.

Cites 1 case

People v. Stahl

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.

Opinion

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Satloff, Appellant.

Attorneys

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Howard Rudnick for appellant.
Denis Dillon, District Attorney (Lawrence J. Schwarz and William C. Donnino of counsel), for respondent.

majority

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant’s contention that the jury’s verdicts on two counts of the indictment are inconsistent is not preserved for our review. Following discharge of the jury, defense counsel complained, for the first time, of the asserted inconsistency. At this point, it was no longer possible to remedy the defect, if any, by resubmission to the jury for reconsideration of its verdicts {People v Stahl, 53 NY2d 1048, 1050). Such a protest must be registered prior to the discharge of the jury properly to preserve the issue for review in this court.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.