Property Clerk of New York City Police Department v. Piacentini

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Property Clerk of New York City Police Department v. Piacentini

160 A.D.2d 465

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

DecidedApril 17, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 160 A.D.2d 465 (Property Clerk of New York City Police Department v. Piacentini) 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

Property Clerk of New York City Police Department v. Piacentini, 160 A.D.2d 465 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered February 6, 1989, which declared the subject automobile to be respondent’s property and which directed petitioner to return the automobile to him, unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The record discloses that two Assistant District Attorneys represented to respondent that his automobile would be returned to him upon his payment of a $50 fine, as part of his plea bargain. While a release by the District Attorney does not preclude an independent forfeiture proceeding by the Property Clerk, we believe that respondent, under the circumstances hereunder, should receive the benefits of his plea bargain (Property Clerk of N. Y. City Police Dept, v Ferris, 158 AD2d 433). Concur—Carro, J. P., Milonas, Asch, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered February 6, 1989, which declared the subject automobile to be respondent’s property and which directed petitioner to return the automobile to him, unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The record discloses that two Assistant District Attorneys represented to respondent that his automobile would be returned to him upon his payment of a $50 fine, as part of his plea bargain. While a release by the District Attorney does not preclude an independent forfeiture proceeding by the Property Clerk, we believe that respondent, under the circumstances hereunder, should receive the benefits of his plea bargain (Property Clerk of N. Y. City Police Dept, v Ferris, 158 AD2d 433). Concur—Carro, J. P., Milonas, Asch, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 A.D.2d 465, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/property-clerk-of-new-york-city-police-department-v-piacentini-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack