People v. Fox

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “[T]he law is well settled that res gestae statement, i.e., declarations accompanying and elucidating the criminal transaction, are not subject to the notice requirement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

1 case in this archive cites this case.

• Bohannon v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama· 2015-10-23· cited 11×

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Bing
  New York Court of Appeals· 1990-07-02· cited 541×
• People v. Tarsia
  New York Court of Appeals· 1980-04-01· cited 331×
• People v. Lancaster
  New York Court of Appeals· 1986-12-18· cited 186×
• Department of Environmental Protection v. Department of Environmental Conservation
  New York Court of Appeals· 1987-09-08· cited 144×
• People v. Cohen
  New York Court of Appeals· 1997-10-30· cited 74×
• People v. Alls
  New York Court of Appeals· 1993-12-21· cited 69×
• People v. Washington
  New York Court of Appeals· 1980-11-13· cited 62×
• People v. Bell
  New York Court of Appeals· 1989-02-16· cited 43×
• People v. Stern
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1996-04-18· cited 22×
• People v. Wells
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1987-09-14· cited 16×
• People v. Boswell
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1993-05-10· cited 12×
• People v. Brownlee
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1986-06-16· cited 7×
• People v. Kent
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1997-06-05· cited 6×