People v. Ball

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ball

41 A.D.2d 689, 342 N.Y.S.2d 637, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5054

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

DecidedFebruary 23, 1973

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 41 A.D.2d 689 (People v. Ball) 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 v. Ball, 41 A.D.2d 689, 342 N.Y.S.2d 637, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5054 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The Syracuse police, during the course of investigating a burglary, were voluntarily admitted into premises at 307 Irving Avenue by the person at the door. While questioning appellant and two other suspects inside the house, they seized part of a watch lying on a book shelf above the suspects’ heads. Since the police lawfully gained entry to the premises, they were entitled to seize evidence in plain view without a warrant even though the arrest was not made until several days later. (People v. Gallmon, 19 N Y 2d 389, cert. den. 390 U. S. 911; People v. Manning, 40 A D 2d 572; and see Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U. S. 443, 465-473; Ker v. California, 374 U. S. 23, 42-43.) The trial court’s denial of appellant’s application to suppress this evidence was proper. (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga Supreme Court convicting defendant of burglary, third degree, and grand larceny, second degree.) Present — Del Vecchio, J. P., Marsh, Witmer and Simons, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The Syracuse police, during the course of investigating a burglary, were voluntarily admitted into premises at 307 Irving Avenue by the person at the door. While questioning appellant and two other suspects inside the house, they seized part of a watch lying on a book shelf above the suspects’ heads. Since the police lawfully gained entry to the premises, they were entitled to seize evidence in plain view without a warrant even though the arrest was not made until several days later. (People v. Gallmon, 19 N Y 2d 389, cert. den. 390 U. S. 911; People v. Manning, 40 A D 2d 572; and see Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U. S. 443, 465-473; Ker v. California, 374 U. S. 23, 42-43.) The trial court’s denial of appellant’s application to suppress this evidence was proper. (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga Supreme Court convicting defendant of burglary, third degree, and grand larceny, second degree.) Present — Del Vecchio, J. P., Marsh, Witmer and Simons, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.2d 689, 342 N.Y.S.2d 637, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5054, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ball-nyappdiv-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack