Legal Opinion

People v. Mendoza

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 22, 1993PublishedCited by 405 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Chief Judge Kaye.

These appeals center on the statutory requirement that a motion to suppress "contain sworn allegations of fact” (CPL 710.60 [1]). In each case, the trial court summarily denied a suppression motion and the Appellate Division affirmed because the motion did not satisfy the statutory requirement, placing before us the legal question of what constitutes factual sufficiency for purposes of a suppression motion.

The issue is best understood by first outlining the governing statute, CPL 710.60. When made before trial, suppression motions must be in writing, state…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. People v. HowardNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. People v. RodriguezNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. People v. WhartonNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. People v. SobotkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
  5. People v. HarrisonNew York Court of Appeals · 1982

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

3Cited by405 opinions

  1. People v. McDonaldNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
  2. State v. ShindlerOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. People v. JonesNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
  4. People v. BurtonNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
  5. The People v. Gary WrightNew York Court of Appeals · 2016

400 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