People v. Rock
| Decision Date | 02 June 1977 |
| Citation | 397 N.Y.S.2d 382,42 N.Y.2d 845 |
| Parties | , 366 N.E.2d 83 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Albert Roy ROCK, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Order affirmed. In view of the findings below, this court is obliged to affirm.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
3 cases
-
People v. Parmes
... ... Where conflicting medical testimony is offered, the question of sanity is for the trier of fact to decide (see, People v. Gilbert, 103 A.D.2d 967, 479 N.Y.S.2d 782; People v. Rock, 49 A.D.2d 666, affd. 42 N.Y.2d 845, 397 N.Y.S.2d 382, 366 N.E.2d 83). As there was no serious flaw in the testimony of the People's expert, the Trial Judge's finding of sanity should not be disturbed on appeal (see, People v. Mainville, 59 A.D.2d 809, 398 N.Y.S.2d 1012; People v. Wood, 12 ... ...
-
People v. Mainville
... ... Hari, 30 A.D.2d 1046, 294 N.Y.S.2d 759 (no expert opinion to rebut defendant's expert proof of insanity)). Absent such flaws, the jury's finding of sanity will not be disturbed (People v. Wood, 12 N.Y.2d 69, 236 N.Y.S.2d 44, 187 N.E.2d 116; People v. Rock, 49 A.D.2d 666, affd. 42 N.Y.2d 845, 397 N.Y.S.2d 382, 366 ... ...
-
People v. Burns
... ... It is the duty of the trier of fact to evaluate and resolve conflicting medical testimony and that determination generally should not be disturbed on appeal. People v. Rock, 49 A.D.2d 666, aff'd, 42 N.Y.2d 845, 397 N.Y.S.2d 382, 366 N.E.2d 83. Further, defendant has failed to demonstrate that the People's expert relied upon an inaccurate presumption, in rejecting the substance of her medical testimony that she did not intentionally commit murder because she suffered ... ...