People v. Cofresi
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Having relied upon “automatic standing” at a time when the continued existence of that doctrine as a matter of State law was in serious question (see United States v Salvucci, 448 US 83; People v Hansen, 38 NY2d 1.7), and failed to offer at the suppression hearing proof of ownership or other reasonable expectation of privacy in the premises from which contraband was seized, defendants have not preserved for our review the search and seizure issues they now urge. Nor are they entitled to a second hearing on…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. SalvucciSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- People v. HavelkaNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Slater v. GallmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. PittAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- People v. BroughtonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- People v. HenryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- People v. AliciaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- People v. WilliamsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.