People v. Warmus
New York County Courts
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
- Elkins v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Nardone v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Robert G. Baker v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968
- Matter of Spector v. AllenNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- People v. HallNew York Supreme Court · 1998
- People v. NeptuneNew York Supreme Court · 1994
- People v. RigginsNew York Supreme Court · 1998
- People v. Owens, New York County Courts1999
- People v. OwensNew York Supreme Court · 2001
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.