People v. Molloy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Molloy

56 A.D.2d 877, 392 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11249

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

DecidedMarch 14, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 56 A.D.2d 877 (People v. Molloy) 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. Molloy, 56 A.D.2d 877, 392 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11249 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both rendered June 7, 1974 (Indictment Nos. 2773-73 and 2774-73), convicting him of assault in the second degree and possession of weapons, etc., as a felony, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review an order of the same court, dated January 10, 1974, which, after a hearing, denied defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence which was found as a result of the warrantless search of his wife’s automobile. Order and judgments affirmed. Under the circumstances here, we find the search to have been proper since the vehicle identified as the one from which the shot was fired was wanted on a police alarm, and was in plain view on a public street. In any event, the actions of the police officers indicated that the vehicle had, in effect, been impounded. "Moreover, to require the police here to have taken the vehicle to the station house for an inventory search would make little common sense” (see People v Kreichman, 37 NY2d 693, 700). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Damiani and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both rendered June 7, 1974 (Indictment Nos. 2773-73 and 2774-73), convicting him of assault in the second degree and possession of weapons, etc., as a felony, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review an order of the same court, dated January 10, 1974, which, after a hearing, denied defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence which was found as a result of the warrantless search of his wife’s automobile. Order and judgments affirmed. Under the circumstances here, we find the search to have been proper since the vehicle identified as the one from which the shot was fired was wanted on a police alarm, and was in plain view on a public street. In any event, the actions of the police officers indicated that the vehicle had, in effect, been impounded. "Moreover, to require the police here to have taken the vehicle to the station house for an inventory search would make little common sense” (see People v Kreichman, 37 NY2d 693, 700). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Damiani and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 A.D.2d 877, 392 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-molloy-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack