Skip to main content

People v. Smith

Citations

  • 79 N.Y.2d 309
  • 591 N.E.2d 1132
  • 582 N.Y.S.2d 946
  • 1992 N.Y. LEXIS 933

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that where no direct evidence of defendant’s mental state exists, the jury must infer mens rea circumstantially
  • noting that where no direct evidence of defendant's mental state exists, the jury must infer mens rea circumstantially
  • “Often there is no direct evidence of a defendant’s mental state and the jury must infer the mens rea circumstantially from the surrounding facts.”
  • “Logically, a defendant cannot act with a specified purpose unless an intent is formed to carry out that purpose. Thus, courts in this State have uniformly read the ‘for the purpose’ language as an intent element of the statute.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kaye, Titone

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

94 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.