New York State Chief Judge Rowan D. Wilson speaks before...

New York State Chief Judge Rowan D. Wilson speaks before administering the oath of office to Associate Judge Caitlin J. Halligan during her swearing-in ceremony at the Court of Appeals in Albany on June 7, 2023.  Credit: AP/Hans Pennink

Here’s a measure of how a new liberal majority and chief judge are changing what happens at New York’s top court: Prosecutors are winning fewer cases.

Since Rowan Wilson was elevated to chief judge and Caitlin Halligan took his spot as associate judge, prosecutors have won about 51% of the cases decided by the state Court Appeals. That compares with about 72% during the final year under Janet DiFiore, Wilson’s predecessor, according to statistics from the Albany Law School of Union University.

"I don’t think any of this is a surprise," said Vincent Bonventre, the law school professor who compiled the data. "Under DiFiore, the court favored prosecutors much, much more. It’s changed under Wilson."

The criminal defense scorecard is one prime example of changes in the court. Another major measure is that the Wilson court is taking a much heavier caseload than DiFiore, who had been criticized for allowing very few cases to reach the top court. Especially criminal cases.

Another analyst said the difference hasn’t been missed by either prosecutors or the defense bar.

"There’s a feeling now within the defense bar that, under Judge Wilson, you have a shot," said Thomas Leith, a Syracuse University Law School professor. "The feeling under Judge DiFiore was that your chances of winning or even getting your case to the top court were never very good.

It’s the latest pendulum swing for the court, which is across a park lawn from the State Capitol in Albany.

In just two-plus decades of this century, the court has gone from a small volume of annual cases to large ones back to small and back to large again. This reflected the management style of the chief judge at the time, from Judith Kaye to Jonathan Lippman to DiFiore to Wilson.

Under the last three judges, criminal outcomes have swung, too.

Under Lippman (2009-15, appointed by then-Gov. Eliot Spitzer), the court averaged hearing more than 200 civil and criminal cases annually, once topping 250. In criminal cases, prosecutors and defendants each won about half.

Under DiFiore, a former district attorney appointed by then-Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, the court’s workload dropped dramatically — often hearing fewer than 100 cases annually — because it frequently refused to hear cases decided by mid-level courts.

Further, prosecutors often won more than 70% of the decisions, even hitting 80% in the court’s 2016-17 session (September to June). During this run, conservatives had a 4-3 majority on the court.

During Wilson’s first full court session (ending June 2024), the Court of Appeals heard 103 cases. For that stretch and up through December, defendants have won almost 50% of the 56 decisions issued.

"The big uptick is cases heard under Judge Wilson is really important," Leith said. "I think everybody should be happy that more cases are being decided" because the top court can clarify statutes and settle instances where mid-level courts issued differing opinions on a legal issue.

Wilson was one of six associate judges under DiFiore and widely was considered among the most liberal. When Gov. Kathy Hochul nominated him to be chief judge — after seeing her first choice, moderate Democrat Hector LaSalle, voted down — the governor named Halligan to Wilson’s spot to fill out the bench.

So, in a way, Halligan replaced DiFiore, which made for a 4-3 liberal majority.

Wilson and Judge Jenny Rivera (a Cuomo appointee) have long been the court's most liberal members. Halligan and Shirley Troutman (a Hochul appointee) don't always agree with them — but they side with the liberal bloc more often than the conservative bloc (Michael Garcia, Madeline Singas and Anthony Cannataro, all Cuomo appointees), Bonventre said.

The District Attorneys Association of New York State declined to comment. The Legal Aid Society, which represents people who cannot afford a lawyer, also declined to comment.

Several key decisions issued by the Wilson court broke 4-3 in favor of a defendant.

For example, in People v. Harvey Weinstein, the court majority overturned the movie mogul’s 2020 rape conviction, saying the trial judge in the landmark #MeToo case prejudiced the ex-movie mogul with improper rulings — including allowing women to testify about allegations that weren’t part of the case.

In People v. Brown, the court said designating a defendant as a sex offender for a robbery that didn’t involve a sexual motive, simply because a child was present, violated the defendant’s due process rights.

In People v. Cuencas, a murder case, the liberal majority ruled that the police’s warrantless search of a defendant’s home wasn’t OK just because a person who had no authority to grant the search did so.

During the trial, an apartment building resident who opened the door for police testified the cops never asked permission, just pushed past him when he open the door slightly. Police testified that when the man opened the door a bit wider, they took it as a sign of permission to enter.

In People v. Debellis, the liberal bloc ordered a new trial based on "ineffective counsel" provided by his lawyer. It’s a tangled case, but in sum, the defendant had said he picked up his gun at his estranged wife’s house and was en route to turn it over at a voluntary buy back program so he could get cash when he was stopped by police and eventually charged with criminal possession of a weapon.

But his lawyer failed to ask the trial judge to have the jury consider Debellis as pursuing "voluntary surrender" of a weapon, which is a valid defense, according to the Court of Appeals decision. The court said "no reasonable strategy" could have validated Debellis’ lawyer’s decision.

In People v. Sebastian Telfair, the court ordered a new trial for former NBA player because the trial judge allowed prosecutors to introduce "alleged evidence of prior bad acts" and discuss the defendant’s likely propensity to commit future bad acts. The case involved a traffic stop where police found a loaded .45-caliber gun and three other handguns in Telfair’s truck.

Anecdotally, the Court of Appeals seems to be reversing mid-level court decisions on criminal cases a bit more frequently, Bonventre said.

"With Gov. Hochul's appointments to the court and the elevation of Judge Wilson to chief, there's definitely a different character to the court," he said.

Here’s a measure of how a new liberal majority and chief judge are changing what happens at New York’s top court: Prosecutors are winning fewer cases.

Since Rowan Wilson was elevated to chief judge and Caitlin Halligan took his spot as associate judge, prosecutors have won about 51% of the cases decided by the state Court Appeals. That compares with about 72% during the final year under Janet DiFiore, Wilson’s predecessor, according to statistics from the Albany Law School of Union University.

"I don’t think any of this is a surprise," said Vincent Bonventre, the law school professor who compiled the data. "Under DiFiore, the court favored prosecutors much, much more. It’s changed under Wilson."

The criminal defense scorecard is one prime example of changes in the court. Another major measure is that the Wilson court is taking a much heavier caseload than DiFiore, who had been criticized for allowing very few cases to reach the top court. Especially criminal cases.

Another analyst said the difference hasn’t been missed by either prosecutors or the defense bar.

"There’s a feeling now within the defense bar that, under Judge Wilson, you have a shot," said Thomas Leith, a Syracuse University Law School professor. "The feeling under Judge DiFiore was that your chances of winning or even getting your case to the top court were never very good.

It’s the latest pendulum swing for the court, which is across a park lawn from the State Capitol in Albany.

In just two-plus decades of this century, the court has gone from a small volume of annual cases to large ones back to small and back to large again. This reflected the management style of the chief judge at the time, from Judith Kaye to Jonathan Lippman to DiFiore to Wilson.

Under the last three judges, criminal outcomes have swung, too.

Under Lippman (2009-15, appointed by then-Gov. Eliot Spitzer), the court averaged hearing more than 200 civil and criminal cases annually, once topping 250. In criminal cases, prosecutors and defendants each won about half.

Under DiFiore, a former district attorney appointed by then-Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, the court’s workload dropped dramatically — often hearing fewer than 100 cases annually — because it frequently refused to hear cases decided by mid-level courts.

Further, prosecutors often won more than 70% of the decisions, even hitting 80% in the court’s 2016-17 session (September to June). During this run, conservatives had a 4-3 majority on the court.

During Wilson’s first full court session (ending June 2024), the Court of Appeals heard 103 cases. For that stretch and up through December, defendants have won almost 50% of the 56 decisions issued.

"The big uptick is cases heard under Judge Wilson is really important," Leith said. "I think everybody should be happy that more cases are being decided" because the top court can clarify statutes and settle instances where mid-level courts issued differing opinions on a legal issue.

Wilson was one of six associate judges under DiFiore and widely was considered among the most liberal. When Gov. Kathy Hochul nominated him to be chief judge — after seeing her first choice, moderate Democrat Hector LaSalle, voted down — the governor named Halligan to Wilson’s spot to fill out the bench.

So, in a way, Halligan replaced DiFiore, which made for a 4-3 liberal majority.

Wilson and Judge Jenny Rivera (a Cuomo appointee) have long been the court's most liberal members. Halligan and Shirley Troutman (a Hochul appointee) don't always agree with them — but they side with the liberal bloc more often than the conservative bloc (Michael Garcia, Madeline Singas and Anthony Cannataro, all Cuomo appointees), Bonventre said.

The District Attorneys Association of New York State declined to comment. The Legal Aid Society, which represents people who cannot afford a lawyer, also declined to comment.

Several key decisions issued by the Wilson court broke 4-3 in favor of a defendant.

For example, in People v. Harvey Weinstein, the court majority overturned the movie mogul’s 2020 rape conviction, saying the trial judge in the landmark #MeToo case prejudiced the ex-movie mogul with improper rulings — including allowing women to testify about allegations that weren’t part of the case.

In People v. Brown, the court said designating a defendant as a sex offender for a robbery that didn’t involve a sexual motive, simply because a child was present, violated the defendant’s due process rights.

In People v. Cuencas, a murder case, the liberal majority ruled that the police’s warrantless search of a defendant’s home wasn’t OK just because a person who had no authority to grant the search did so.

During the trial, an apartment building resident who opened the door for police testified the cops never asked permission, just pushed past him when he open the door slightly. Police testified that when the man opened the door a bit wider, they took it as a sign of permission to enter.

In People v. Debellis, the liberal bloc ordered a new trial based on "ineffective counsel" provided by his lawyer. It’s a tangled case, but in sum, the defendant had said he picked up his gun at his estranged wife’s house and was en route to turn it over at a voluntary buy back program so he could get cash when he was stopped by police and eventually charged with criminal possession of a weapon.

But his lawyer failed to ask the trial judge to have the jury consider Debellis as pursuing "voluntary surrender" of a weapon, which is a valid defense, according to the Court of Appeals decision. The court said "no reasonable strategy" could have validated Debellis’ lawyer’s decision.

In People v. Sebastian Telfair, the court ordered a new trial for former NBA player because the trial judge allowed prosecutors to introduce "alleged evidence of prior bad acts" and discuss the defendant’s likely propensity to commit future bad acts. The case involved a traffic stop where police found a loaded .45-caliber gun and three other handguns in Telfair’s truck.

Anecdotally, the Court of Appeals seems to be reversing mid-level court decisions on criminal cases a bit more frequently, Bonventre said.

"With Gov. Hochul's appointments to the court and the elevation of Judge Wilson to chief, there's definitely a different character to the court," he said.

Schumer SALT latest ... LIer to sing at inauguration ... FeedMe: New coffee shops Credit: Newsday

Snow on the way ... Cold forces inauguration inside ... Future Jewlers in Baldwin ... Battling the beetles

SUBSCRIBE

Unlimited Digital AccessOnly 25¢for 6 months

ACT NOWSALE ENDS SOON | CANCEL ANYTIME