People v. Butler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Butler

280 A.D.2d 399, 720 N.Y.S.2d 788, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1756

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 280 A.D.2d 399 (People v. Butler) 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. Butler, 280 A.D.2d 399, 720 N.Y.S.2d 788, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1756 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J., on suppression motion; Joseph Fisch, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered February 20, 1998, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, held in abeyance and the matter remitted to Supreme Court for a hearing on defendant’s motion to suppress identification testimony as fruit of an allegedly unlawful seizure.

As the People correctly concede, defendant made a sufficient showing to warrant a hearing on his suppression motion (see, People v Hightower, 85 NY2d 988). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Williams, Tom and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J., on suppression motion; Joseph Fisch, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered February 20, 1998, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, held in abeyance and the matter remitted to Supreme Court for a hearing on defendant’s motion to suppress identification testimony as fruit of an allegedly unlawful seizure.

As the People correctly concede, defendant made a sufficient showing to warrant a hearing on his suppression motion (see, People v Hightower, 85 NY2d 988). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Williams, Tom and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

280 A.D.2d 399, 720 N.Y.S.2d 788, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1756, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-butler-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack