People v. Jordan
50 N.E.3d 913, 27 N.Y.3d 979
This text of 50 N.E.3d 913 (People v. Jordan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
People v. Jordan, 50 N.E.3d 913, 27 N.Y.3d 979 (N.Y. 2016).
Opinions
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant failed to preserve his contention that the trial court discharged prospective jurors based on hardship without conducting a sufficient inquiry (see People v King, 27 NY3d 147 [2016] [decided herewith]). Defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
The People v. Urselina King
50 N.E.3d 869 (New York Court of Appeals, 2016)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
50 N.E.3d 913, 27 N.Y.3d 979, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jordan-ny-2016.