People v. McFarlane

995 N.E.2d 845, 21 N.Y.3d 1034
New York Court of Appeals·Decided August 29, 2013·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. The determination as to whether a defendant has consented to a search involves a mixed question of law and fact (People v Valerio, 95 NY2d 924, 925 [2000]). Where, as here, there exists record support for the Appellate Division’s resolution of this question, the issue is beyond this Court’s further review (id.).

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, in a memorandum.

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

People v. McFarlane, 995 N.E.2d 845, 21 N.Y.3d 1034 (N.Y. 2013).

995 N.E.2d 845 (People v. McFarlane) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Xochimitl
32 N.Y.3d 1026 (New York Court of Appeals, 2018)