People v. Carson

216 A.D.2d 965, 629 N.Y.S.2d 366, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7398
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 9, 1995·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Local criminal courts have preliminary jurisdiction of all offenses (CPL 10.30 [2]). The issuance of a search warrant involves the exercise of preliminary jurisdiction (see, Preiser, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 11A, CPL 10.30 [1992]). A "county judge sitting as a local criminal court” is a " '[l]ocal criminal court’ ” (CPL 10.10 [3] [g]) with the authority to issue search warrants. Although not in effect when the subject warrant was issued, CPL 690.35 (2) now expressly provides that an application for a search warrant may be made to a County Court Judge. Thus, we reject defendant’s contentions that County Court was not acting as a local criminal court when it issued the search warrant and that the warrant was defective because it did not state that the Judge was sitting as a local criminal court. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Doyle, J.—Criminal Possession Marihuana, 1st Degree.) Present—Pine, J. P., Fallon, Doerr, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

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

People v. Carson, 216 A.D.2d 965, 629 N.Y.S.2d 366, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7398 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

216 A.D.2d 965 (People v. Carson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Rhoades
166 Misc. 2d 979 (New York Supreme Court, 1995)