People v. Deluca

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Deluca

204 A.D.2d 655, 614 N.Y.S.2d 237

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

DecidedMay 23, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 204 A.D.2d 655 (People v. Deluca) 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. Deluca, 204 A.D.2d 655, 614 N.Y.S.2d 237 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the People from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County (Pitts, J.), dated May 7, 1993, which, after a hearing, granted the branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his oral and written statements to law enforcement officials.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, the branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his oral and written statements to law enforcement officials is denied, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings.

The County Court was without authority to entertain the oral suppression motion made by the defendant in violation of [656]*656CPL 710.60 (1) (see, People v Mezon, 80 NY2d 155). We also find that the People had not waived their right to a written suppression motion (cf., People v Jennings, 69 NY2d 103, 113). Ritter, J. P., Copertino, Santucci and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the People from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County (Pitts, J.), dated May 7, 1993, which, after a hearing, granted the branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his oral and written statements to law enforcement officials.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, the branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his oral and written statements to law enforcement officials is denied, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings.

The County Court was without authority to entertain the oral suppression motion made by the defendant in violation of [656]*656CPL 710.60 (1) (see, People v Mezon, 80 NY2d 155). We also find that the People had not waived their right to a written suppression motion (cf., People v Jennings, 69 NY2d 103, 113). Ritter, J. P., Copertino, Santucci and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 A.D.2d 655, 614 N.Y.S.2d 237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-deluca-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack