From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Rosenblatt v. Jiudice

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 13, 1975
47 A.D.2d 721 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)

Opinion

January 13, 1975

Not published with other decisions of January 13, 1975, 47 A.D.2d 529. [Rep.



On the court's own motion, its decision dated January 2, 1975 is amended by adding thereto the following: In our opinion, the respondent Judge would have been well advised to reserve decision on the motion to suppress to afford the District Attorney an opportunity on the trial to establish the admissibility of the seized photographs, etc. Under the circumstances, we assume that, if a motion for reargument be made in the County Court, it will be granted to the extent herein indicated. Gulotta, P.J., Hopkins, Cohalan, Christ and Shapiro, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Rosenblatt v. Jiudice

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 13, 1975
47 A.D.2d 721 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)
Case details for

Matter of Rosenblatt v. Jiudice

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ALBERT M. ROSENBLATT, as District Attorney of Dutchess…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 13, 1975

Citations

47 A.D.2d 721 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)

Citing Cases

US E. Co. of N.Y. v. Jpmorgan Chase Bank

Indeed, the determination of whether to preclude the introduction of evidence is better left to the trial…