Legal Opinion

People v. Wood

New York Court of Appeals

Decided February 7, 1973PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Per curiam

One who alone occupies a room in a hotel or an apartment in an apartment house is deemed to have exclusive possession and control over those premises — at least for purposes of search and seizure in the criminal law — and no third party may consent to their being entered or searched by the police. (See Stoner v. California, 376 U. S. 483; Chapman v. United States, 365 U. S. 610.) The case'before us, however, is quite different. Here, the bedroom, which was searched, was actually shared by the defendant — a roomer in a one-family house owned by Mrs. Dale — and the latter’s 10-year-old.son.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Stoner v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Chapman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. People v. GallmonNew York Court of Appeals · 1967

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. People v. CosmeNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. State v. FolkensSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
  3. Grant v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1979
  4. State v. FrameCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  5. People v. LottAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984

21 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