Legal Opinion

People v. Randazzo

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 15, 1964PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment affirmed. Defendant-appellant, as a parolee, was deprived of no constitutional rights by the search and seizure which was made under the circumstances of this case (People ex rel. Natoli v. Lewis, 287 N. Y. 478; Anderson v. Corall, 263 U. S. 193).

Concur: Judges' Dye, Van Voorhís, Burke, Scileppi and Bergan. Chief Judge Desmond concurs solely on the ground that the search of the parolee’s apartment was incidental to his arreSt oh a valid administrative warrant; Judge Fuld dissents in the following opinion.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Anderson v. CorallSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. People Ex Rel. Natoli v. LewisNew York Court of Appeals · 1942

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. CullisonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1970
  2. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1979
  3. United States Ex Rel. Randazzo v. FolletteDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1968
  4. United States Ex Rel. Joseph Randazzo v. Harold W. Follette, Warden of Green Haven Prison, Stormville, New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
  5. United States v. LewisDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1967

9 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