The People v. Ganesh R. Ramsaran

79 N.E.3d 1120, 29 N.Y.3d 1070
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 29, 2017
Docket105 SSM 11
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 79 N.E.3d 1120 (The People v. Ganesh R. Ramsaran) 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
The People v. Ganesh R. Ramsaran, 79 N.E.3d 1120, 29 N.Y.3d 1070 (N.Y. 2017).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the case remitted to the Appellate Division for consideration of issues raised, but not determined, on the appeal to that Court.

The People’s forensic expert gave statistical testimony regarding the likelihood (“1.661 quadrillion times more likely”) that defendant and his deceased wife, rather than two randomly selected individuals, were contributors to a DNA *1071 mixture profile drawn from a blood stain on defendant’s sweatshirt. The prosecutor, during his summation, summarized this testimony by telling the jury that the victim’s DNA was “on” defendant’s sweatshirt. Defense counsel’s failure to object to this characterization did not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel. The expert testimony regarding the “likelihood ratio” here contrasts with the testimony at issue in People v Wright (25 NY3d 769 [2015]), which “only indicated that defendant could not be excluded from the pool of male DNA contributors, and . . . provided no statistical comparison to measure the significance of those results” (Wright, 25 NY3d at 771). Nor did counsel’s other alleged errors of representation, either individually or collectively, deprive defendant of meaningful representation.

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Garcia and Wilson concur; Judge Feinman taking no part.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed and case remitted to the Appellate Division, Third Department, for consideration of issues raised but not determined on appeal to that Court, in a memorandum.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Oquendo
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2026
Matter of Canning v. Revoir
196 N.Y.S.3d 810 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People v. Sanon
2021 NY Slip Op 05233 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Powell
2018 NY Slip Op 6768 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Boyd
2018 NY Slip Op 1714 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Ramsaran
2017 NY Slip Op 7163 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
79 N.E.3d 1120, 29 N.Y.3d 1070, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-people-v-ganesh-r-ramsaran-ny-2017.