From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bagley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 30, 2001
279 A.D.2d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

January 30, 2001.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (James Yates, J.), entered on or about December 21, 1999, which denied nonparty appellant The New York City Police Department's motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted.

Thomas M. O'Brien for defendant-respondent.

Tahirih M. Sadrieh for nonparty appellant.

Morrie I. Kleinbart Grace Vee, Robert S. Dean Cynthia Feathers for Criminal Bar Association.

New York State District Attorneys Association, New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and New York Criminal Bar Association, Amici Curiae.

Morrie I. Kleinbart Grace Vee, Robert S. Dean Cynthia Feathers

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Lerner, Buckley, Friedman, JJ.


Since the Police Department was not a party to the underlying criminal action, it may properly appeal from the order denying the motion to quash the subpoena duces tecum (Matter of Cunningham v. Nadjari, 39 N.Y.2d 314;Matter of Grand Jury Subpoena, 111 A.D.2d 891, lv denied 65 N.Y.2d 606).

The motion court erroneously denied the Police Department`s motion to quash the subpoena duces tecum since defendant failed to put forth a factual predicate to support the contention that the documents sought in the subpoena will bear relevant and exculpatory evidence (Matter of Constantine v. Leto, 157 A.D.2d 376, affd for reasons stated 77 N.Y.2d 975;People v. Gissendanner, 48 N.Y.2d 543). Without the factual predicate, defendant's subpoena merely constitutes a discovery demand directed to a non-party, which is in contravention to the discovery provisions of CPL Article 240.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Bagley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 30, 2001
279 A.D.2d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Bagley

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF, v. WILLIAM BAGLEY…

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

Date published: Jan 30, 2001

Citations

279 A.D.2d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
720 N.Y.S.2d 454

Citing Cases

People v. Williams

DOC further argues that although defendant may obtain documents if they qualify as exculpatory evidence, he…

People v. Juarez

We reject Robles's reliance on a line of Appellate Division authority that distinguishes between parties and…