Legal Opinion
People v. Farenga
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 18, 1977PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*1093Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The tax investigator’s testimony, taken as a whole in conjunction with information supplied to him by his supervisor, furnished the requisite probable cause for him to enter the driveway and observe the activity there (cf. People v Rizzo, 40 NY2d 425; People v Hanlon, 36 NY2d 549, 557-559; People v Malinsky, 15 NY2d 86, 91; People v Coffey, 12 NY2d 443, cert den 376 US 916).
Furthermore, though a private driveway leading to a home is not outside the area entitled to protection against unreasonable search and seizure (US Const,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Mancusi v. DeForteSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- People v. HanlonNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. MalinskyNew York Court of Appeals · 1965
- People v. CoffeyNew York Court of Appeals · 1963
- Lybrand v. LevittAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers v. Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- People v. CalhounNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- People v. AlbertiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- People v. BoydNew York Supreme Court · 1984
- People v. MalteseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.