TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. Perrino

The People of the State of New York v. Anthony Perrino

People v. Perrino, 96 A.D.2d 952 (1983)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
August 29, 1983
Citations
96 A.D.2d 952466 N.Y.S.2d 4081983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19581

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), rendered June 9, 1981, convicting him of assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial ordered. Two of the witnesses who testified at the defendant’s trial had been hypnotized in an effort to have them recall more of the details of the evening in question. The trial court held a pretrial hearing to determine the admissibility of the two witnesses’ testimony, and concluded that the hypnotic sessions were not conducted in a suggestive manner. Consequently, the court ruled that their testimony, both prehypnotic and posthypnotic, was admissible, and the fact of prior hypnosis was a matter affecting credibility only. Subsequently, the Court of Appeals ruled in People v Hughes ( 59 NY2d 523 ), that a witness may testify only to the extent of his prehypnotic recollection, and even then, only if the People *953 demonstrate that the hypnosis was not impermissibly suggestive. Inasmuch as the instant witnesses were not so restricted, the conviction must be reversed, and a new trial held. The finding of the trial court that the hypnosis did not have an unduly suggestive impact as regards the witnesses’ prehypnotic recollection had support in the record, and need not be disturbed. Accordingly, at the new trial, both witnesses may testify, but only as to their prehypnotic recollections. O’Connor, J. P., Weinstein, Bracken and Boyers, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1984: 21987: 119842026peak 1984 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Prewitt v. State460 So. 2d 296 (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)
  2. People v. Guerra690 P.2d 635 (Cal. 1984)
  3. People v. Perrino127 A.D.2d 858 (1987)

Most recent

  1. People v. Perrino127 A.D.2d 858 (1987)
  2. People v. Guerra690 P.2d 635 (Cal. 1984)
  3. Prewitt v. State460 So. 2d 296 (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
People v. Hughes, 453 N.E.2d 484 (N.Y. 1983) 140

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list