People v. Victor
| Citation | 547 N.Y.S.2d 831,74 N.Y.2d 874 |
| Parties | , 547 N.E.2d 86 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Lamont VICTOR, also known as Victor Townes, also known as Victor Lamont, Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 24 October 1989 |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division, 149 A.D.2d 363, 540 N.Y.S.2d 670, should be modified and the case remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for a hearing on defendant's motion to suppress evidence.
This case presents the same issue as People v. Giles, 73 N.Y.2d 666, 543 N.Y.S.2d 37, 541 N.E.2d 37, albeit with one notable difference: once Supreme Court, New York County, denied defendant's motion to suppress, defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and one count of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, rather than proceeding to trial as did his codefendant Giles. In People v. Giles (supra), we held that the Appellate Division did not have the power to rely upon later-developed trial evidence to retrospectively decide the merits of an unlitigated suppression motion. Therefore, the Appellate Division erred in granting defendant's motion to suppress and dismissing the indictment by relying upon the facts as established by a trial record rather than a suppression hearing record. That error was compounded in this case, however, when the court failed to confine itself to the facts and law before it and relied upon the facts developed in a wholly separate case.
We remit this case directly to Supreme Court, for a hearing on defendant's motion to suppress evidence. If defendant prevails, then the indictment against him should be dismissed, or if the People prevail, then the judgment should be amended to reflect that determination.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order modified and case remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Townes v. City of New York
...later remitted the case to the New York Supreme Court for a hearing on the original motion to suppress. People v. Victor, 74 N.Y.2d 874, 547 N.Y.S.2d 831, 547 N.E.2d 86 (1989). Eventually, the indictment was Townes commenced the present action in 1994, pleading: (1) claims against each of t......
-
People v. Dearstyne
...entry of a judgment of conviction (see People v. Bilal, 27 N.Y.3d 961, 962, 29 N.Y.S.3d 863, 49 N.E.3d 1155 [2016] ; People v. Victor, 74 N.Y.2d 874, 876, 547 N.Y.S.2d 831, 547 N.E.2d 86 [1989] ; People v. Millan, 69 N.Y.2d 514, 521, 516 N.Y.S.2d 168, 508 N.E.2d 903 [1987] ; People v. Carte......
-
People v. Gundersen
... ... However, no evidence was presented by the People at the defendant's suppression hearing with respect to that testimony. Accordingly, the court erred in relying upon facts developed in separate hearings to buttress its conclusion with respect to attenuation (see, People v. Victor, 74 N.Y.2d 874, 876, 547 N.Y.S.2d 831, 547 N.E.2d 86) ... Moreover, none of the remaining factors considered by the court supports the conclusion that the videotaped statement was properly attenuated from the illegal police conduct. The mere fact the several hours elapsed is ... ...