- About Us
- What We Do
- Special Projects
- Clemency
- Federal Litigation Advisory Group
- Forensic Science Project
- Immigrant Justice Practice
- Impact Litigation Project
- Access to Appeals
- Justice First Project
- Legislation Committee
- Racial Justice Project
- SORA
- Survivors Advocacy Practice
- The Plea Project
- Youth and Emergent Adult Resentencing Project
- Youthful Offender Reapplication Project
- For Clients & Families
- For the Legal Community
Amicus Curiae Briefing
See below for links to recent Amicus briefing
The filing of amicus briefs on important legal questions provides a unique opportunity for CAL to share its appellate expertise and experience with the State's high court. CAL has filed amicus briefs in numerous Court of Appeals cases, which we have compiled here.
People v. Dunton, February 2024, addressing flaws in NY's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel standards, including whether appellant must show that an omitted argument was "so weak as to not be worth raising" to prevail, and whether counsel's performance must be assessed on the actual reason for a challenged omission, not hypothetical ones contradicted by the record.
People v. Shanks, July 2021, arguing that the fundamental rights to trial counsel and a neutral judge may not be waived.
People v. Ogando, & People v. Rodriguez, September 2020, arguing that the NYCA should abandon the practice of appeal waivers or impose limitations on it.
People ex rel. McCurdy v. Warden, December 2019, arguing that SARA's residency restrictions do not apply to people released to postrelease supervision after completing their prison terms.
People v. Cubero, August 2019, arguing that the appellate divisions have abeyance-remittal power when exercising their interest-of-justice authority.
People v. Giuca, April 2019, arguing that a prosecutor many not withhold knowledge from the defense of circumstantial evidence from which a jury might reasonably infer that a prosecution witness has a motive to lie simply because the prosecutor believes such a determination would be 'false.'
McDonough v. Smith, November 2018 (US Supreme Court), challenging the decision of the Second Circuit, which held that an individual must bring a claim for the unlawful fabrication of evidence under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 within three years of when that person “learned of the fabrication of the evidence and its use against him in criminal proceedings,” and “was deprived of a liberty interest by,” for example, an arrest or trial.
People v. Jones, September 2018, challenging the First Department's interpretation of the Organized Crime Control Act, for deleting the distinct-structure requirement, and requring only that a group's pattern of criminal activity feature a modus operandi, such as a "role" assignment.
People v. Slocum, December 2016, asserting that an appearance or communication by a suspect's existing attorney on behalf of the suspect in a custodial matter establishes entry for purposes of NY's indelible right to counsel.
In re Jesse Friedman v. Rice, November 2016, Challenging the Second Department's decision--that the government may
withhold under FOIL's confidential source exemption any statement by any nontestifying witness--as inconsistent with the language and purpose of the statute, and with decisions
issued by every other New York appellate court.
People ex rel. McManus v. Horn, December 2011, addressing whether Criminal Procedure Law section 520.10(2) prohibits courts from ordering a single form of bail--in this case "cash only" bail--and instead required courts to authorize at least two forms of bail.