People v. Restifo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Restifo

47 A.D.2d 792, 366 N.Y.S.2d 66, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9107

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

DecidedMarch 27, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 47 A.D.2d 792 (People v. Restifo) 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. Restifo, 47 A.D.2d 792, 366 N.Y.S.2d 66, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9107 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court .of Albany-County, rendered October 16, 1972, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of grand larceny in the third degree, a. felony.. When this case was previously before us (People v. Res tifo, 44. A D 2d 870), we withheld determination of the appeal and remitted the matter to .the — County. Court, Albany County, for a hearing on the issue of whether defendant had been personally present at the time a suppression hearing had be6h held. After a hearing, the trial court has now found that the defendant was not present 'at the time of the suppression hearing on September 20, 1972. This determination is supported by the evidence in. the record. A. suppression hearing is part of the trial at which the defendant must be present. Since the defendant was absent from the hearing, his' conviction must be reversed. (People v. Anderson, 16 N Y 2d 282.) Judgment reversed, On the law and the facts, and a new trial ordered.. Herlihy, P. J<,'Greenblott, Swéeney, Main and Reynolds, JJ.. concur.,

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

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court .of Albany-County, rendered October 16, 1972, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of grand larceny in the third degree, a. felony.. When this case was previously before us (People v. Res tifo, 44. A D 2d 870), we withheld determination of the appeal and remitted the matter to .the — County. Court, Albany County, for a hearing on the issue of whether defendant had been personally present at the time a suppression hearing had be6h held. After a hearing, the trial court has now found that the defendant was not present 'at the time of the suppression hearing on September 20, 1972. This determination is supported by the evidence in. the record. A. suppression hearing is part of the trial at which the defendant must be present. Since the defendant was absent from the hearing, his' conviction must be reversed. (People v. Anderson, 16 N Y 2d 282.) Judgment reversed, On the law and the facts, and a new trial ordered.. Herlihy, P. J<,'Greenblott, Swéeney, Main and Reynolds, JJ.. concur.,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.2d 792, 366 N.Y.S.2d 66, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-restifo-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack