Legal Opinion
People v. Mercado
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 7, 1984PublishedCited by 8 opinions
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The court did not abuse its discretion as a matter of law in denying the defendant’s motion to reopen the suppression hearing. A court is not bound to grant a motion to reopen in order to entertain a new issue based on a decision announced after the motion to suppress has been denied (People v Grosfeld, 58 NY2d 887). Here, as in Grosfeld, the defendant failed to meet the threshold requirement for such relief because he did not establish a factual predicate at the hearing to support his contention that the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- People v. KaminskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. GrosfeldNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
3Cited by8 opinions
- People v. GrecoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- People v. De MossAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- People v. GilerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Tirado v. WalshDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- People v. MurrayAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.