People v. Hamilton

186 A.D.2d 995, 590 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11524
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Hamilton. Read the opinion of the Court — 186 A.D.2d 581

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that the suppression court should have suppressed the rifle seized from his room because the People failed to meet their burden of establishing exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless entry and search by the police (see, People v Hodge, 44 NY2d 553, 557; People v Vennor, 176 AD2d 1217). We disagree. The record fully supports the court’s finding that the police actions were justified. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Kubiniec, J. — Criminal Possession of a Weapon, 4th Degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Green, Pine, Boehm and Davis, JJ.

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

People v. Hamilton, 186 A.D.2d 995, 590 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11524 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

186 A.D.2d 995 (People v. Hamilton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Vennor
176 A.D.2d 1217 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)