Legal Opinion

People v. Warmus

New York County Courts

Decided June 21, 1990PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

John Carey, J.

"[T]he method by which the District Attorney gained posses*375sion of the disputed items — a subpoena returnable ’forthwith’ to himself * * * should not be replicated.” So said the Court of Appeals on March 27, 1990, in People v Natal (75 NY2d 379, 384-385 [1990]). But replication, in the same District Attorney’s office, was only a few days in coming. Faced with such pointed disregard of CPL article 610, this court must fashion appropriate remedial action, or become itself an accomplice.

Testimony was taken at a hearing held between June 15 and 20,1990, pursuant…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Elkins v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  2. Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  3. Nardone v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  4. Robert G. Baker v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968
  5. Matter of Spector v. AllenNew York Court of Appeals · 1939

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. People v. HallNew York Supreme Court · 1998
  2. People v. NeptuneNew York Supreme Court · 1994
  3. People v. RigginsNew York Supreme Court · 1998
  4. People v. Owens, New York County Courts1999
  5. People v. OwensNew York Supreme Court · 2001

1 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