People ex rel. Sharkey v. New York State Police of Batavia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Sharkey v. New York State Police of Batavia

22 A.D.2d 1006, 254 N.Y.S.2d 719, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2671

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 3, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 22 A.D.2d 1006 (People ex rel. Sharkey v. New York State Police of Batavia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People ex rel. Sharkey v. New York State Police of Batavia, 22 A.D.2d 1006, 254 N.Y.S.2d 719, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2671 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: The order affirmed is referred to in the notice of appeal as bearing date of December 2,1963. Actually, it is dated November 4, 1963, but there is no doubt that it is the order described in the petition because in the notice of appeal it is recited that the order denied petitioner a copy of the complaint, a copy of the warrant of arrest and a copy of the search warrant. In the moving papers he designated the copy of the complaint as a copy of the information. However, it appears there were no such papers in the possession of the respondent at any time and, therefore, of course; they cannot be produced. (Appeal from order of Special Term, Genesee , County denying motion by relator for an order directing respondent to furnish certain information as to the charge lodged against him.) Present—Williams, P. J., Goldman, Henry and Noonan, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: The order affirmed is referred to in the notice of appeal as bearing date of December 2,1963. Actually, it is dated November 4, 1963, but there is no doubt that it is the order described in the petition because in the notice of appeal it is recited that the order denied petitioner a copy of the complaint, a copy of the warrant of arrest and a copy of the search warrant. In the moving papers he designated the copy of the complaint as a copy of the information. However, it appears there were no such papers in the possession of the respondent at any time and, therefore, of course; they cannot be produced. (Appeal from order of Special Term, Genesee , County denying motion by relator for an order directing respondent to furnish certain information as to the charge lodged against him.) Present—Williams, P. J., Goldman, Henry and Noonan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.2d 1006, 254 N.Y.S.2d 719, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-sharkey-v-new-york-state-police-of-batavia-nyappdiv-1964.