People v. Bostic, 222 A.D.2d 1073 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Bostic, 222 A.D.2d 1073 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: People v. Hardgers (nyappdiv, 1995-12-22)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" People v. Hardgers
N.Y. App. Div. · 1995 · signal: see · confidence high
Here, the "searching officers rel[ied] in good faith on the apparent capability of [defendant’s sixteen-year-old sister] to consent to a search and the circumstances reasonably indicate[d] that [she did], in fact, have the authority to consent” (People v Adams, 53 NY2d 1, 9 , rearg denied 54 NY2d 832 , cert denied 454 US 854 ; see, People v Bostic [appeal No. 1], 222 AD2d 1073 [decided herewith]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Tommie Bostic
Appeal No. 1.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Dec 22, 1995.
222 A.D.2d 1073
Cited by 7 opinions  |  Published

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: There is no merit to the contention of defendant that his plea was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666; People v Francis, 38 NY2d 150, 153). (Appeal from Judgment of Steuben County Court, Purple, Jr., J. — Attempted Forgery, 2nd Degree.) Present — Denman, P. J., Lawton, Wesley, Balio and Davis, JJ.