People v. Harris, 465 N.E.2d 36 (NY 1984). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Harris, 465 N.E.2d 36 (NY 1984). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
20 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: People v. Cipolla (nycountyct, 1995-11-08)
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1984 2005 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Cipolla
nycountyct · 1995 · confidence medium
The Arnau holding was further clarified in People v Harris ( 62 NY2d 706, 708 [1984]) wherein the Court stated: "The validity of the warrant to search the apartment based upon * * * properly obtained information, would not be tainted even if the same application contained unlawfully acquired information; provided, of course, that the lawfully acquired information is sufficient to provide probable cause for the search.” Based upon the credible evidence, I am satisfied that the Federal Magistrate was presented with evidence that was grounded upon information independent of the illegal "tour”…
discussed Cited "see" People v. Lexune
N.Y. App. Div. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
However, only "lawfully acquired information" in a search warrant application may "provide probable cause for [a] search" warrant ( People v Harris , 62 NY2d 706, 708 ; see People v Barizone , 201 AD3d 810 , 810; People v Clark , 194 AD3d 948 , [*2]950). "[W]here a search warrant application contains some information obtained through unlawful means, a search pursuant to that warrant will nevertheless be upheld if the application contained sufficient lawfully obtained information, untainted by and independent of the illegality to constitute probable cause" ( People v Vonderhyde , 114 AD2d 479, …
discussed Cited "see" People v. Edwards
N.Y. App. Div. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
However, only "lawfully acquired information" in a warrant application may "provide probable cause for [a] [*2]search" warrant ( People v Harris , 62 NY2d 706, 708 ; see People v Barizone , 201 AD3d 810, 810 ; People v Clark , 194 AD3d 948, 950 ). "[W]here a search warrant application contains some information obtained through unlawful means, a search pursuant to that warrant will nevertheless be upheld if the application contained sufficient lawfully obtained information, untainted by and independent of the illegality, to constitute probable cause" ( People v Vonderhyde , 114 AD2d 479, 480 ; …
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. Barizone
N.Y. App. Div. · 2022 · signal: see also · confidence low
The affidavit in support of the search warrant of the defendant's property contained "sufficient lawfully obtained information" independent of the flyover to constitute probable cause ( People v Vonderhyde , 114 AD2d 479, 480 ; see also People v Harris , 62 NY2d 706, 708 ).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. Richardson
N.Y. App. Div. · 2004 · signal: see also · confidence medium
To begin, we agree with County Court’s ruling that after excising the tainted information relied upon in obtaining the warrant—the suppressed lineup identification—the search warrant used to seize defendant’s clothing was nevertheless supported by sufficient untainted information, acquired prior to the illegal detention, to provide reasonable cause for its issuance (see People v Arnau, supra at 33, 33 n 1; see also People v Harris, 62 NY2d 706, 708 [1984]; People v Binns, 299 AD2d 651, 654 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 612 [2003]).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. King
nycountyct · 1994 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
(People v Vonderhyde, 114 AD2d 479, 480 [2d Dept 1985]; see, e.g., People v Harris, 62 NY2d 706 [1984]; People v Bacalocostantis, 121 AD2d 812 [3d Dept 1986]; compare, Matter of William D. v Rohl, 148 AD2d 706 [2d Dept 1989].) The defendant does not challenge the safety or reliability of the method by which the blood sample was physically taken.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. Litchko
N.Y. App. Div. · 1986 · signal: see also · confidence low
On the contrary, the scenario outlined above confirms that the boots could readily have been seized on the basis of information gathered prior to, and independent of, information flowing from the illegal statements (see, People v Arnau, 58 NY2d 27, 32-33 , cert denied 468 US 1217 ; see also, People v Harris, 62 NY2d 706, 707 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Darlene Harris, Appellant
New York Court of Appeals.
May 3, 1984.
465 N.E.2d 36
Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye Concur.
Cited by 18 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

[*708] information provided in the application for the warrant to search defendant’s apartment to justify the issuance of that warrant.

Before the detective opened the mailbox, he had discovered lawfully that the occupant of a certain apartment owned the keys found near the victim’s body and that these keys fit the defendant’s mailbox. This information, together with the other incriminating evidence acquired before and unrelated to the opening of the mailbox, was sufficient to support the lawful issuance of a warrant to conduct the search of the defendant’s apartment which, in turn, led to the incriminating evidence which the defendant sought to suppress.

The validity of the warrant to search the apartment based upon this properly obtained information, would not be tainted even if the same application contained unlawfully acquired information; provided, of course, that the lawfully acquired information is sufficient to provide probable cause for the search (People v Arnau, 58 NY2d 27, 38). Here, all of the evidence which was found, including that one of the keys fit the mailbox assigned to the defendant, was included in the search warrant application. That evidence, establishing the probability that the killer lived in the apartment, provided ample cause for the issuance of the warrant.

We have considered defendant’s other arguments and find them to be without merit.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wacht-ler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.