People v. Schwartz

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Schwartz

420 N.E.2d 397, 52 N.Y.2d 1062, 438 N.Y.S.2d 516, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2278

DecidedFebruary 26, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 420 N.E.2d 397 (People v. Schwartz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Schwartz, 420 N.E.2d 397, 52 N.Y.2d 1062, 438 N.Y.S.2d 516, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2278 (N.Y. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

[1064]*1064OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum

On the record here, it was error to refuse to grant the application for a hearing on defendant’s motion to controvert the search warrant. Therefore the order of the Appellate Division should be modified and the matter remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, to hold a hearing and determine the motion anew. In the event defendant prevails, the plea should be vacated and appropriate further proceedings ensue. However, if it is the People who prevail, the judgment should be amended to reflect the additional proceedings that have taken place.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order modified and case remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.

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

[1064]*1064OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum

On the record here, it was error to refuse to grant the application for a hearing on defendant’s motion to controvert the search warrant. Therefore the order of the Appellate Division should be modified and the matter remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, to hold a hearing and determine the motion anew. In the event defendant prevails, the plea should be vacated and appropriate further proceedings ensue. However, if it is the People who prevail, the judgment should be amended to reflect the additional proceedings that have taken place.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order modified and case remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

420 N.E.2d 397, 52 N.Y.2d 1062, 438 N.Y.S.2d 516, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-schwartz-ny-1981.