People v. Sneed

191 A.D.2d 969, 595 N.Y.S.2d 341, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2919
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 12, 1993·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously modified as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice and as modified affirmed in accordance with the following Memorandum: Defendant’s contention that his state[970]*970ment should have been suppressed based on a violation of Payton v New York (445 US 573) was not raised before the suppression court and is unpreserved for our review (see, People v Martin, 50 NY2d 1029). We decline to reach that issue in the interest of justice. We modify, however, to provide that all sentences run concurrently (see, CPL 470.15 [6] [b]). (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Egan, J.— Attempted Rape, 1st Degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Pine, Lawton, Boomer and Davis, JJ.

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

People v. Sneed, 191 A.D.2d 969, 595 N.Y.S.2d 341, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2919 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

191 A.D.2d 969 (People v. Sneed) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

BRITTON, BRIAN F., PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
People v. Britton
113 A.D.3d 1101 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)