Legal Opinion

People v. Bell

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

Decided July 19, 2011PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant’s contention that the police failed to establish probable cause for his arrest on the ground that the arresting officers did not testify at the suppression hearing was improperly raised for the first time on the defendant’s motion for leave to reargue his omnibus motion (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Cherry, 302 AD2d 472 [2003]). In any event, contrary to the defendant’s contention, the testimony of the detective who investigated the case was sufficient to support the hearing court’s determination that there was probable cause for his arrest. Although the arresting officers did…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. People v. BleakleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. People v. DanielsonNew York Court of Appeals · 2007
  3. People v. RomeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
  4. People v. MateoNew York Court of Appeals · 2004
  5. People v. Ramirez-PortorealNew York Court of Appeals · 1996

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. BondsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  2. People v. HigginsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  3. People v. BondsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  4. People v. DawsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API