People v. Tarallo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tarallo

48 A.D.2d 611, 367 N.Y.S.2d 286, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9587

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

DecidedMay 1, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 48 A.D.2d 611 (People v. Tarallo) 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. Tarallo, 48 A.D.2d 611, 367 N.Y.S.2d 286, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9587 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered on January 31, 1974, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty of the crime of possession of gambling records, in the second degree, in violation of section 225.15 of the Penal Law, unanimously reversed, on the law, the second count in the indictment dismissed and matter remanded to the trial court for further proceedings on the indictment, as the District Attorney deems advisable. We are of the opinion that the gambling records seized should be suppressed because of the failure of the police officers to announce their authority or purpose before entering the apartment, since the search warrant did not expressly authorize a "no knock” entry. (CPL 690.50; 690.35, subd 3, par [b]); People v Floyd, 26 NY2d 558; People v Mecca, 41 AD2d 897.) Concur—Markewich, J. P., Murphy, Tilzer, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered on January 31, 1974, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty of the crime of possession of gambling records, in the second degree, in violation of section 225.15 of the Penal Law, unanimously reversed, on the law, the second count in the indictment dismissed and matter remanded to the trial court for further proceedings on the indictment, as the District Attorney deems advisable. We are of the opinion that the gambling records seized should be suppressed because of the failure of the police officers to announce their authority or purpose before entering the apartment, since the search warrant did not expressly authorize a "no knock” entry. (CPL 690.50; 690.35, subd 3, par [b]); People v Floyd, 26 NY2d 558; People v Mecca, 41 AD2d 897.) Concur—Markewich, J. P., Murphy, Tilzer, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 611, 367 N.Y.S.2d 286, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9587, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tarallo-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack