You are here: / / SORA Hearing Procedure.
,

SORA Hearing Procedure.

In this case, the Second Department clearly laid out the acceptable sources of information, the applicable standards of proof, and the criteria for departure from the presumptive level in a SORA hearing. People vs Lacewell, 2008-07498, Second Dept. 2-20-13

 

You might also like
Dismissal of a Criminal Charge In the Interest of Justice Can Constitute a “Termination In Favor of the Accused” In the Context of a Malicious Prosecution Cause of Action
As a Contingent Remainder of the Subject Trust, the “Charitable Trust” Had the Right to Intervene in a Proceeding to Remove and Replace the Trustee of the Subject Trust
DOMESTIC RELATIONS LAW NO LONGER REQUIRES EXHAUSTION OF ENFORCEMENT REMEDIES BEFORE A MOTION FOR CIVIL CONTEMPT CAN BE BROUGHT.
PETITIONER FAILED TO EXHAUST AVAILABLE ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES AFTER THE APPLICATION FOR A BUILIDING PERMIT WAS DENIED BY APPEALING TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS; THE FAILURE WAS NOT EXCUSED ON THE GROUND THAT A CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE WAS AT STAKE (SECOND DEPT).
A WALKWAY WET FROM RAIN WHICH WAS FALLING AT THE TIME OF THE SLIP AND FALL WAS NOT ACTIONABLE (SECOND DEPT).
Court’s Review Powers Re: a Zoning Board’s Interpretation of an Ordinance Explained—Reviewing Court Need Not Defer to the Board’s Ruling on a Purely Legal Issue/Here Zoning Board Properly Interpreted the Ordinance—Criteria Explained
CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES FOR CRIMINAL SALE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AND CONSPIRACY WERE PROPER, CRITERIA EXPLAINED IN SOME DEPTH (SECOND DEPT). ​
THE FOIL REQUEST FOR THE NUMBER AND LOCATION OF LICENSE PLATE READERS (LPR’S) SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED (SECOND DEPT).

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

Witness Impeached With Attorney’s Statements. Order Not Appealable, Did Not Affect Substantial Right.