People v. Nielsen
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Contrary to the People’s contention, the defendant’s argument that certain physical evidence and statements he made to law enforcement officials should be suppressed as the fruit of an unlawful arrest is preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Wynn, 25 AD3d 576, 577 [2006]). However, the Supreme Court properly denied those branches of the defendant’s omnibus motion which were to suppress certain physical evidence and statements he made to law enforcement officials (see United States v Knights, 534 US 112 [2001]; Payton v *1042New York, 445 US 573 [1980]). The court’s…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States v. KnightsSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- People v. MinleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- People v. AndersonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- People v. SchofAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- People v. XochimitlAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- People v. JaramilloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. LopezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- People v. FrederiqueAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- People v. PoinvilAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2015
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.