Broadhurst v. West

1 Citing case

  1. Maisonet v. Conway

    CV-04-2860 (CPS) (E.D.N.Y. Jul. 10, 2007)   Cited 7 times
    Finding claim procedurally barred because "the thirty-day time limit set out in CPL ยง 460.10 for filing of leave to appeal has expired, barring Petitioner from pursuing any further argument on that claim in state court"

    Petitioner has not pursued the argument that the trial judge abused his discretion in denying the motion for a mistrial in this application, apparently because the United Stats Supreme Court has held that the right to testify may "bow to accommodate other legitimate interests in the criminal trial process" so long as any restrictions are not "arbitrary or disproportionate to the purposes they are designed to serve." Rock v. Arkansas, 483 U.S. 44, 55-56 (1987); see also Broadhurst v. West, 2006 WL 89946, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) ("The interest in orderly procedure is certainly a legitimate interest."); U.S. v. Jones, 880 F.2d 55, 59 (8th Cir. 1989); U.S. v. Byrd, 403 F.3d 1278, 1288 (11th Cir. 2005).