People v. Frazier

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Frazier

92 A.D.2d 594, 459 N.Y.S.2d 730, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16851

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 1983

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 92 A.D.2d 594 (People v. Frazier) 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. Frazier, 92 A.D.2d 594, 459 N.Y.S.2d 730, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16851 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendants from two judgments (one as to each of them) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (DeLury, J.), both rendered March 11,1980, convicting them of burglary in the third degree, petit larceny and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon jury verdicts, and imposing sentences. Matters remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings consistent herewith and in the interim the appeals are held in abeyance. Prior to trial, a hearing was held pursuant to a motion made by defendant Jones and joined in by defendant Frazier to suppress certain evidence. The motion was denied in part. In rendering its decision, the court failed to set forth “its findings of fact, its conclusions of law and the reasons for its determination” as is required by CPL 710.60 (subds 4, 6). In light of the conflicting testimony offered at the hearing, the court which heard and saw the witnesses must report its findings of fact. The report shall comply with CPL 710.60 (subds 4, 6) and be filed with all convenient speed. Gibbons, J. P., O’Connor, Weinstein and Brown, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendants from two judgments (one as to each of them) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (DeLury, J.), both rendered March 11,1980, convicting them of burglary in the third degree, petit larceny and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon jury verdicts, and imposing sentences. Matters remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings consistent herewith and in the interim the appeals are held in abeyance. Prior to trial, a hearing was held pursuant to a motion made by defendant Jones and joined in by defendant Frazier to suppress certain evidence. The motion was denied in part. In rendering its decision, the court failed to set forth “its findings of fact, its conclusions of law and the reasons for its determination” as is required by CPL 710.60 (subds 4, 6). In light of the conflicting testimony offered at the hearing, the court which heard and saw the witnesses must report its findings of fact. The report shall comply with CPL 710.60 (subds 4, 6) and be filed with all convenient speed. Gibbons, J. P., O’Connor, Weinstein and Brown, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 A.D.2d 594, 459 N.Y.S.2d 730, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-frazier-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack