People v. Paccione

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Paccione

259 A.D.2d 564, 684 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2254

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

DecidedMarch 8, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 259 A.D.2d 564 (People v. Paccione) 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. Paccione, 259 A.D.2d 564, 684 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2254 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County [565]*565(Hall, J.), dated March 6, 1998, which granted that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress certain physical evidence recovered from his residence.

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting the provisions thereof granting those branches of the defendant’s motion which were to suppress the following items of physical evidence: (1) the short-rimmed cap, (2) the imitation pistol, (3) the .9 millimeter bullet, and (4) the twelve .38 caliber bullets, and substituting therefor a provision denying those branches of the defendant’s motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed.

The order is modified for the reasons set forth in the companion case of People v Paccione (259 AD2d 563 [decided herewith]). Santucci, J. P., Joy, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County [565]*565(Hall, J.), dated March 6, 1998, which granted that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress certain physical evidence recovered from his residence.

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting the provisions thereof granting those branches of the defendant’s motion which were to suppress the following items of physical evidence: (1) the short-rimmed cap, (2) the imitation pistol, (3) the .9 millimeter bullet, and (4) the twelve .38 caliber bullets, and substituting therefor a provision denying those branches of the defendant’s motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed.

The order is modified for the reasons set forth in the companion case of People v Paccione (259 AD2d 563 [decided herewith]). Santucci, J. P., Joy, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D.2d 564, 684 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2254, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-paccione-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack