Summary
In Matherson the court there allowed evidence that was seized, saying the seizure was valid as incidental to a lawful arrest even though the search warrant was defective.
Summary of this case from People v. KokichOpinion
Argued March 18, 1965
Decided April 22, 1965
Appeal from the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, VINCENT R. IMPELLITTERI, P.J., ARTHUR BRAUN and MITCHELL J. SHERWIN, JJ., WILLIAM E. RINGEL, P.J., VINCENT R. IMPELLITTERI and JOHN J. MANGAN, JJ.
Stanley Hendricks for appellant.
Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney ( Milton M. Stein and H. Richard Uviller of counsel), for respondent.
Judgment affirmed. The seizure of evidence upon which the conviction is based was an incident to a lawful arrest on sufficient cause in a place open to public access. Therefore, the fact a search warrant was defective, as the People concede, because it was a general warrant (cf. Marcus v. Search Warrant, 367 U.S. 717; Stanford v. Texas, 379 U.S. 476) did not preclude the reception in evidence of exhibits seized as an incident to the arrest.
Concur: Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, FULD, VAN VOORHIS, BURKE, SCILEPPI and BERGAN.