People v. Floyd
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtBreitel, J.
Because the police, otherwise authorized to make a lawful arrest, effected the arrest by unlawful means, the evidence obtained as a result of the arrest may not be used and defendant’s conviction must be reversed and the indictment dismissed. This result is required as a consequence of the application of the search and seizure provision of the Federal Constitution to the States under the Fourteenth Amendment (U. S. Const., 4th Amdt.; 14th Amdt.), and the exclusionary rule applied to the States under the holding in Mapp v. Ohio, (367 U. S. 643).
Defendant, after a jury trial, was convicted of a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Ker v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- McDonald v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Miller v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- People v. LaFontaineNew York Court of Appeals · 1998
- State v. CoyleWashington Supreme Court · 1980
- United States v. KozakUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1982
- People v. DylaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.