Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Mayo

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

Decided February 19, 2009Published

1Dissent

Acosta and Freedman, JJ., dissent in a memorandum by Acosta, J.,

as follows: I respectfully dissent because the majority extends the room presumption to drugs not in plain view. Given the absence of evidence that respondent exercised dominion and control over the apartment, this extension dangerously casts too wide a net of criminality.

On December 28, 2006, at 12:30 a.m., defendant was arrested in a Brooklyn apartment with John Bosmond and Leola Nimmons for allegedly possessing various quantities of drugs in Nimmons’s apartment. Neither Bosmond or defendant lived there, although Bosmond was…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. People v. ManiniNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. People v. BundyNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
  3. People v. PearsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. People v. HeadleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. People v. DawkinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988

4 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