People v. Hamilton

2026 NY Slip Op 00794
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 11, 2026
DocketInd. No. 1365/20
StatusPublished

This text of 2026 NY Slip Op 00794 (People v. Hamilton) 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. Hamilton, 2026 NY Slip Op 00794 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

People v Hamilton (2026 NY Slip Op 00794)
People v Hamilton
2026 NY Slip Op 00794
Decided on February 11, 2026
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on February 11, 2026 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, J.P.
VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON
PAUL WOOTEN
JANICE A. TAYLOR, JJ.

2022-05296
(Ind. No. 1365/20)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, appellant,

v

Dylan Hamilton, respondent.


Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill, Nancy Fitzpatrick Talcott, Andrew Z. Wu, and Jonathan E. Maseng of counsel), for appellant.

Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Robert C. Langdon of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (David J. Kirschner, J.), dated May 5, 2022. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a hearing, granted that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from.

The underlying facts of this appeal are set forth in this Court's decision and order in People v Creary (236 AD3d 672, 673), determining the codefendant's appeal from the same order now before this Court. For the same reasons we held in People v Creary in favor of the codefendant, here, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence (see id. at 674-675; People v Dubuisson, 206 AD3d 757, 759; People v Pearson, 59 AD3d 743, 744).

IANNACCI, J.P., BRATHWAITE NELSON, WOOTEN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Pearson
59 A.D.3d 743 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2026 NY Slip Op 00794, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hamilton-nyappdiv-2026.