People v. Sapir

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sapir

191 A.D.2d 724, 596 N.Y.S.2d 715

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

DecidedMarch 29, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 191 A.D.2d 724 (People v. Sapir) 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. Sapir, 191 A.D.2d 724, 596 N.Y.S.2d 715 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinions

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brill, J.), rendered May 2, 1990, convicting him of grand larceny in the second degree (two counts), offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (27 counts), and nonpayment of taxes in violation of Tax Law § 289-b (2) (20 counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress statements made by him to law enforcement authorities.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5) (see, People v Shurka, 191 AD2d 724 [decided herewith]). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brill, J.), rendered May 2, 1990, convicting him of grand larceny in the second degree (two counts), offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (27 counts), and nonpayment of taxes in violation of Tax Law § 289-b (2) (20 counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress statements made by him to law enforcement authorities.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5) (see, People v Shurka, 191 AD2d 724 [decided herewith]). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 A.D.2d 724, 596 N.Y.S.2d 715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sapir-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack