Majority Opinions:

• In re World Trade Center Bombing Litigation Steering Committee v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 17 NY3d 428 (2011). Writing for a 4-3 majority, Jones held that the Port Authority was acting in a quasi-governmental role while providing security for the World Trade Center site and, as such, enjoyed qualified governmental immunity for failing to prevent an underground terrorist truck bombing.

• Jiovon Anonymous v. City of Rochester, 13 NY3d 35 (2009). Jones wrote for a 5-2 majority that Rochester’s curfew for youths under age 17 between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. infringed on the constitutional rights of the youths without a sufficient showing that a curfew would curtail rowdy behavior and crimes.

• People v. Bailey, 13 NY3d 67 (2009). Jones wrote for the majority in a 5-2 ruling that a defendant’s knowledge that he possessed counterfeit bills was insufficient to prove a charge of possession of a forged instrument. Jones wrote that prosecutors must also show intent on the part of the defendant to prove the charge.

• Bourdeleau v. New York State, 18 NY3d 305 (2011). Jones wrote for a 6-1 majority that public benefit corporations are not subject to prohibitions under the state Constitution against giving state funds to private companies. The ruling came in a case challenging the legality of state economic development grants to private companies.


• People v. Ford, 11 NY3d 875 (2008). When the court reinstated a robbery conviction in a case that turned on the sufficiency of the evidence, Jones described as “bizarre” the majority’s conclusion that a defendant’s failure to object to an erroneous charge was fatal to his appeal.

• People v. Baret, 11 NY3d 31 (2008). In a case involving a “no-split” plea bargain unavailable to either defendant unless both pleaded guilty, Jones said “connected pleas have an inherent tendency to coerce [defendants] and, thus, deserve heightened scrutiny.”

• People v. Sanchez, 13 NY3d 554 (2009). Jones led a three-judge dissent when the court concluded that a defendant could be convicted of a gang assault “even if one or more of the persons who aid do not share his or her intent to cause physical harm.” He said the ruling would allow individuals to be convicted of gang assault “merely because they were uninvolved bystanders in the area or unwitting aiders.”

• People v. Bedessie, NY Slip Op 2342 (2012). Jones dissented in a first-impression case in which the court held that trial judges are not required to let jurors hear expert testimony about the reliability of a suspect’s confession. He was concerned that the jury was not allowed to consider “research concerning incidents that lead to false confessions and the tactics in this case that may have compromised the reliability of the confession.”