FN96: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: People v. Esposito, 144 Misc. 2d 919, 545 N.Y.S.2d 468 (Sup. Ct. 1989), related reference, 144 Misc. 2d 1085, 545 N.Y.S.2d 673 (Sup. Ct. 1989) and related reference, 146 Misc. 2d 847, 553 ...) |
(No difference)
|
Latest revision as of 12:35, 28 February 2009
People v. Esposito, 144 Misc. 2d 919, 545 N.Y.S.2d 468 (Sup. Ct. 1989), related reference, 144 Misc. 2d 1085, 545 N.Y.S.2d 673 (Sup. Ct. 1989) and related reference, 146 Misc. 2d 847, 553 N.Y.S.2d 612 (Sup. Ct. 1990) and order aff'd, 160 A.D.2d 378, 554 N.Y.S.2d 16 (1st Dep't 1990).
As to the applicability of privilege against self-incrimination to grand jury proceedings, see 38 Am. Jur. 2d, Grand Jury § 38.
Wardius v. Oregon, 412 U.S. 470, 93 S. Ct. 2208, 37 L. Ed. 2d 82 (1973).
As to the admissibility of computerized evidence, see Admissibility of Computerized Business Records, 14 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 2d 173.