From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Haynes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 31, 1998
256 A.D.2d 1193 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

December 31, 1998

Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Cosgrove, J. — Criminal Possession Marihuana, 2nd Degree.


Case held, decision reserved and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Defendant was convicted following a jury trial of criminal possession of marihuana in the second degree (Penal Law § 221.25). The conviction arises from defendant's alleged possession of more than 16 ounces of marihuana that the police seized upon execution of a search warrant at defendant's residence. The search warrant authorized the police to search the premises located at "1008 E. Ferry St. upper rear apartment, Bflo 2 1/2 story yellow wood frame dwelling and business". It is undisputed that the police searched the third floor attic at the premises and seized a quantity of marihuana that was included in the indictment to arrive at the required felony weight. Defendant contends that the warrant did not authorize the search of any premises outside of the upper rear apartment. Supreme Court erred in denying defendant's request for a hearing on that issue. In its decision, the court determined that "the attic apartment which was accessible only through the upper rear apartment was an area of the premises authorized to be searched by the terms of the warrant".

Although the testimony at both the pretrial Huntley hearing and at trial appear to contradict the court's determination that the attic apartment was accessible only through the upper rear apartment, we cannot decide that issue based upon that testimony (see, People v. Dodt, 61 N.Y.2d 408, 417). Therefore, we hold the case, reserve decision and remit the matter to Supreme Court for a suppression hearing on that issue (see, People v. Giles, 73 N.Y.2d 666, 671-672).

We have reviewed the remaining issues, including those raised in defendant's pro se supplemental brief, and conclude that they are without merit.

Present — Denman, P. J., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., Callahan and Fallon, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Haynes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 31, 1998
256 A.D.2d 1193 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Haynes

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EMERSON HAYNES…

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

Date published: Dec 31, 1998

Citations

256 A.D.2d 1193 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
683 N.Y.S.2d 460

Citing Cases

People v. Moore

Here, the warrant at issue authorized a search of "865 WOODLAWN UPPER APT. BUFFALO , N.Y. 2 ½ STORY WOOD…

People v. Moore

Here, the warrant at issue authorized a search of "865," and drugs and drug packaging materials were found by…