Legal Opinion

People v. Honeycutt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 30, 1999PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: By moving to suppress evidence seized from his home at the time of his arrest solely on the basis that the warrantless entry into his home was not justified by exigent circumstances, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the evidence should have been suppressed because it was not in plain view and was the product of an unlawful search (see, People v Claudio, 64 NY2d 858; People v Brooks, 231 AD2d 867, lv denied 89 NY2d 862). We decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. ClaudioNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
  2. People v. BrooksAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. CallowayAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
  2. People v. DoveAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
  3. People v. PinkardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API