From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. De Grandis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 28, 1962
16 A.D.2d 834 (N.Y. App. Div. 1962)

Opinion

May 28, 1962


Appeal by each of the three named defendants (De Grandis, De Forte and Zundel) from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, entered June 21, 1960 after a jury trial, convicting him of (a) conspiracy to violate section 340 Gen. Bus. of the General Business Law (Penal Law, § 580, subd. 1); (b) coercion (Penal Law, § 530); and (c) extortion (Penal Law, §§ 850, 851), and imposing sentence. As to each defendant, judgment affirmed. Defendants cannot invoke the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution with respect to the union records which were received in evidence. Such records were not the defendants' private, personal papers; they were the property of the union. Whatever possession the defendants had of these records was merely in their capacity as representatives of the union, and not in their private or individual capacity ( United States v. White, 322 U.S. 694; see, also, Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 646-657, 661-665; Davis v. United States, 328 U.S. 582, 587, as to the interrelationship between U.S. Const. Amendts., Fourth, Fifth). We have examined all the other contentions made by the appellants and find them to be untenable. Beldock, P.J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. De Grandis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 28, 1962
16 A.D.2d 834 (N.Y. App. Div. 1962)
Case details for

People v. De Grandis

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOSEPH DE GRANDIS…

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

Date published: May 28, 1962

Citations

16 A.D.2d 834 (N.Y. App. Div. 1962)

Citing Cases

People v. De Vivo

The television set was not found at defendant's premises, for which the officers had a search warrant, but,…

People v. Cefaro

In this connection the court said (pp. 491-492): "We must then consider the admissibility of the narcotics…