People v. Benthall

65 N.Y. 679
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedMay 30, 1985
StatusPublished

This text of 65 N.Y. 679 (People v. Benthall) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Benthall, 65 N.Y. 679 (N.Y. 1985).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. The finding of the courts below that the statements in question were not sufficiently attenuated from the initial unlawful search has support in the record and thus presents a mixed question of law and fact beyond our review (see, People v Van Luven, 64 NY2d 625, 627). In addition, while the People contend that the police officers’ good faith should have been taken into account in determining the legality of this pr e-Payton search (Payton v New York, 445 US 573), there was no factual basis for such a conclusion.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur; Judges Alexander and Titone taking no part.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

Related

Payton v. New York
445 U.S. 573 (Supreme Court, 1980)
People v. Van Luven
474 N.E.2d 246 (New York Court of Appeals, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
65 N.Y. 679, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-benthall-ny-1985.