People v. Garzia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Garzia

56 A.D.2d 635, 391 N.Y.S.2d 697, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10748

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 56 A.D.2d 635 (People v. Garzia) 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. Garzia, 56 A.D.2d 635, 391 N.Y.S.2d 697, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10748 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Consolidated appeal by the People from five orders of the County Court, Westchester County (one as to each defendant), four dated January 8, 1976, and one (as to defendant Ronald Costello) dated January 22, 1976, which granted the branches of defendants’ respective motions which sought suppression of certain physical evidence. Orders reversed, on the law, and the said branches of the motions are denied. The affidavit in support of the search warrant and the search warrant application are sufficient to establish probable cause for its issuance (see People v Gerace, 55 AD2d 626; People v Hanlon, 36 NY2d 549). Moreover, the warrant accurately described the premises and persons to be searched (cf. People v Nieves, 36 NY2d 396). The assertions by the police that the items to be seized were drugs which could be easily and quickly disposed of, and that the occupants of the house were known as hunters and might possess firearms, justified the "any time” and "no knock” provisions in the warrant. Cohalan, Acting P. J., Damiani and Hawkins, JJ., concur; Hargett and Mollen, JJ., concur in the result under the constraint of People v Gerace (55 AD2d 626; see, also, People v Rose, 31 NY2d 1036).

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

Consolidated appeal by the People from five orders of the County Court, Westchester County (one as to each defendant), four dated January 8, 1976, and one (as to defendant Ronald Costello) dated January 22, 1976, which granted the branches of defendants’ respective motions which sought suppression of certain physical evidence. Orders reversed, on the law, and the said branches of the motions are denied. The affidavit in support of the search warrant and the search warrant application are sufficient to establish probable cause for its issuance (see People v Gerace, 55 AD2d 626; People v Hanlon, 36 NY2d 549). Moreover, the warrant accurately described the premises and persons to be searched (cf. People v Nieves, 36 NY2d 396). The assertions by the police that the items to be seized were drugs which could be easily and quickly disposed of, and that the occupants of the house were known as hunters and might possess firearms, justified the "any time” and "no knock” provisions in the warrant. Cohalan, Acting P. J., Damiani and Hawkins, JJ., concur; Hargett and Mollen, JJ., concur in the result under the constraint of People v Gerace (55 AD2d 626; see, also, People v Rose, 31 NY2d 1036).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 A.D.2d 635, 391 N.Y.S.2d 697, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10748, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-garzia-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack