History
  • No items yet
midpage
People v. Jose
94 N.Y.2d 844
| NY | 1999
|
Check Treatment
94 N.Y.2d 844 (1999)
724 N.E.2d 366
702 N.Y.S.2d 574

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,
v.
CARLOS JOSE, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York.

Argued November 16, 1999.
Decided December 16, 1999.

*845 Speiser & Heinzmann, White Plains (Joseph C. Heinzmann, Jr., of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney of New York County, New York City (Bruno C. Bier and Donald J. Siewert of counsel), for respondent.

*846 Before: Chief Judge KAYE and Judges BELLACOSA, SMITH, LEVINE, CIPARICK, WESLEY and ROSENBLATT concur.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. The determination whether defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy involved a mixed question of law and fact. Where, as here, there exists record support for the Appellate Division's determination of this mixed question, the issue is beyond this Court's further review (see, e.g., People v Ortiz, 83 NY2d 840, 843).

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Case Details

Case Name: People v. Jose
Court Name: New York Court of Appeals
Date Published: Dec 16, 1999
Citation: 94 N.Y.2d 844
Court Abbreviation: NY
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.