People v. Surita

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Surita

235 N.E.2d 915, 21 N.Y.2d 830, 288 N.Y.S.2d 913, 1968 N.Y. LEXIS 1627

DecidedFebruary 15, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 235 N.E.2d 915 (People v. Surita) 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. Surita, 235 N.E.2d 915, 21 N.Y.2d 830, 288 N.Y.S.2d 913, 1968 N.Y. LEXIS 1627 (N.Y. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion to amend remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and, when returned, it will be amended by adding thereto the following: Upon the appeal herein there was presented and necessarily passed upon a question under the Constitution of the United States, viz.: Appellant contended that evidence sought to be used against him should have been suppressed because it was procured by an unlawful search and seizure, in violation of his rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States, in that the search warrant, pursuant to which the search and seizure was conducted, was issued without probable cause and did not particularly describe the things to be seized. The Court of Appeals held that appellant’s constitutional rights had not been violated. [See 21 N Y 2d 658.]

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

Motion to amend remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and, when returned, it will be amended by adding thereto the following: Upon the appeal herein there was presented and necessarily passed upon a question under the Constitution of the United States, viz.: Appellant contended that evidence sought to be used against him should have been suppressed because it was procured by an unlawful search and seizure, in violation of his rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States, in that the search warrant, pursuant to which the search and seizure was conducted, was issued without probable cause and did not particularly describe the things to be seized. The Court of Appeals held that appellant’s constitutional rights had not been violated. [See 21 N Y 2d 658.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 N.E.2d 915, 21 N.Y.2d 830, 288 N.Y.S.2d 913, 1968 N.Y. LEXIS 1627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-surita-ny-1968.