Mendoza v. City of New York
90 A.D.3d 453, 933 N.Y.2d 863
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 8, 2011·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
[454] No triable issue of fact exists as to whether the detention, arrest, or prosecution was supported by probable cause, given that the police found plaintiff in a state of undress on premises identified in a valid search warrant as a drug distribution point, and a controlled substance was recovered from those premises (see Martinez v City of Schenectady, 97 NY2d 78, 85 [2001]; People v Mayo, 59 AD3d 250, 254-255 [2009], affd 13 NY3d 767 [2009]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Moskowitz, Richter and AbdusSalaam, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Mendoza v. City of New York, 90 A.D.3d 453, 933 N.Y.2d 863 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).
90 A.D.3d 453 (Mendoza v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Jackson v. City of New York
2020 NY Slip Op 3068 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Suero v. City of New York
2020 NY Slip Op 1301 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Luna v. City of New York
95 A.D.3d 413 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)