From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gonzalez

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 3, 1972
291 N.E.2d 391 (N.Y. 1972)

Opinion

Argued October 30, 1972

Decided November 3, 1972

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, EDWARD J. GREENFIELD, J.

Leslie Trager for appellant.

Burton B. Roberts, District Attorney ( Dwight D. Darcy of counsel), for respondent.


Order affirmed in the following memorandum: Contrary to the argument advanced by the People, it is of absolutely no consequence that appellant, absent from his apartment when the search was made, failed to claim a proprietary interest in the premises at the hearing on his motion to suppress. Charged with possessory crimes, standing was conferred on him on the simple showing that the People sought to use the contraband evidence against him ( Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257; People v. Smith, 35 Misc.2d 533, 535-536). However, although we conclude that appellant obviously had standing, we find no reversible error in the admission of the evidence against him and it may not be said that appellant's Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights have been impaired.

Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON.


Summaries of

People v. Gonzalez

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 3, 1972
291 N.E.2d 391 (N.Y. 1972)
Case details for

People v. Gonzalez

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOSE GONZALEZ…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 3, 1972

Citations

291 N.E.2d 391 (N.Y. 1972)
291 N.E.2d 391
339 N.Y.S.2d 112

Citing Cases

People v. Cokley

The People's claim that the defendant lacks standing to contest denial of the suppression is raised for the…

People v. Jefferson

In addition, the defendant did not claim possession of the goods in the apartment (cf. People v. Gonzalez, 31…