People v. Reynolds

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Reynolds

71 A.D.2d 1008, 420 N.Y.S.2d 393, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13346

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

DecidedSeptember 24, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 71 A.D.2d 1008 (People v. Reynolds) 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. Reynolds, 71 A.D.2d 1008, 420 N.Y.S.2d 393, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13346 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered February 17, 1978, upon his adjudication as a youthful offender. Judgment affirmed. Upon review of the instant record, we find that the trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion to suppress, without a hearing. In an affirmation submitted in support of the motion, defense counsel averred only that "defendant may have been interrogated by detectives in a manner calculated to deprive the defendant of his constitutional rights”. Since this conclusory statement was not supported by any allegations of fact, summary denial of the application was appropriate (see CPL 710.60, subd 3; People v Roberto H., 67 AD2d 549). Under the circumstances, we do not reach the question of whether defendant waived his right to seek review of the denial of the suppression motion. Shapiro, J. P., Cohalan, Margett and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered February 17, 1978, upon his adjudication as a youthful offender. Judgment affirmed. Upon review of the instant record, we find that the trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion to suppress, without a hearing. In an affirmation submitted in support of the motion, defense counsel averred only that "defendant may have been interrogated by detectives in a manner calculated to deprive the defendant of his constitutional rights”. Since this conclusory statement was not supported by any allegations of fact, summary denial of the application was appropriate (see CPL 710.60, subd 3; People v Roberto H., 67 AD2d 549). Under the circumstances, we do not reach the question of whether defendant waived his right to seek review of the denial of the suppression motion. Shapiro, J. P., Cohalan, Margett and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 A.D.2d 1008, 420 N.Y.S.2d 393, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-reynolds-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack