From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Holland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 2, 1994
204 A.D.2d 348 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

May 2, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leahy, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered, to be preceded by a de novo suppression hearing on that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which is to suppress his statements to law enforcement officials. The facts have been considered and are determined to have been established.

The defendant's judgment of conviction must be reversed, a new trial held, and a de novo suppression hearing held with respect to the defendant's statements to law enforcement officials for the reasons set forth in the companion appeal of codefendant Neb Morrow (see, People v. Morrow, 204 A.D.2d 356 [decided herewith]).

We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, P.J., Pizzuto, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Holland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 2, 1994
204 A.D.2d 348 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Holland

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CHE FITZGERALD…

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

Date published: May 2, 1994

Citations

204 A.D.2d 348 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
612 N.Y.S.2d 955

Citing Cases

People v. Morrow

No findings of fact have been raised or considered. The defendant was jointly tried with his codefendant, Che…