Legal Opinion

People v. Smith

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 29, 1967PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Per curiam

Since the defendant William Smith was not named or described in the warrant and since the arresting officer did not have probable cause to believe that he had committed a crime — although he did enter the premises while the officer was there — the motion to suppress which he made should be granted. (See, e.g., United States v. Di Re, 332 U. S. 581, 587; United States v. Festa, 192 F. Supp. 160, 163; People v. Brown, 40 Misc 2d 35, 43.)

However, in regard to the claims of the other defendants, it is clear that the Trial Judge believed the facts insufficient to sustain the warrant only because…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. Di ReSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  2. United States v. FestaDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1960
  3. People v. BrownCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1963

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. PlatouSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  2. Willis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
  3. State v. NabarroHawaii Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Wallace v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
  5. Smith v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1974

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API