Legal Opinion

People v. Ocampo

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 23, 1985PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Carol Berkman, J.

There must be a nexus between the violation of a defendant’s constitutional rights and the seizure of evidence before he has standing to move to suppress it. The mere fact that each defendant in five cases at bar was riding in a vehicle *218which was stopped does not alone create that nexus, even assuming that the stops were without basis and accordingly violated their personal constitutional rights. In fact, in moving to suppress, each defendant herein has carefully refrained from connecting his presence to the finding of the contraband.

Thus, this court…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Rakas v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Delaware v. ProuseSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. United States v. SalvucciSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Rios v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. BellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  2. People v. CatalanoNew York Supreme Court · 1987
  3. People v. MejiaNew York Supreme Court · 1986
  4. People v. DavisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API