Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 New York opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Smithgreen2 sentences2020Nevertheless, defendant's contention in appeal No. 1 that he was "unlawfully arrested in his home without an arrest warrant in violation of Payton v New York ( 445 US 573 [1980]) is unpreserved for our review inasmuch as he failed to raise it before [the court]" ( People v Britton , 113 AD3d 1101, 1101 [4th Dept 2014], lv denied 22 NY3d 1154 [2014]; see People v Smith , 55 NY2d 888, 890 [1982]). 2014Defendant’s contention that he was unlawfully arrested in his home without an arrest warrant in violation of Payton v New York ( 445 US 573 [1980]) is unpreserved for our review inasmuch as he failed to raise it before County Court (see People v Smith, 55 NY2d 888, 890 [1982]; People v Long, 195 AD2d 610, 610 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 756 [1993]; People v Sneed, 191 AD2d 969, 969-970 [1993]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). | 3 | 4 |
People v. Goforthgreen2 sentences2014Defendant’s contention that he was unlawfully arrested in his home without an arrest warrant in violation of Payton v New York ( 445 US 573 [1980]) is unpreserved for our review inasmuch as he failed to raise it before County Court (see People v Smith, 55 NY2d 888, 890 [1982]; People v Long, 195 AD2d 610, 610 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 756 [1993]; People v Sneed, 191 AD2d 969, 969-970 [1993]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). 2014Defendant’s contention that he was unlawfully arrested in his home without an arrest warrant in violation of Payton v New York ( 445 US 573 [1980]) is unpreserved for our review inasmuch as he failed to raise it before County Court (see People v Smith, 55 NY2d 888, 890 [1982]; People v Long, 195 AD2d 610, 610 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 756 [1993]; People v Sneed, 191 AD2d 969, 969-970 [1993]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). | 2 | 3 |
People v. Longgreen2 sentences2014Defendant’s contention that he was unlawfully arrested in his home without an arrest warrant in violation of Payton v New York ( 445 US 573 [1980]) is unpreserved for our review inasmuch as he failed to raise it before County Court (see People v Smith, 55 NY2d 888, 890 [1982]; People v Long, 195 AD2d 610, 610 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 756 [1993]; People v Sneed, 191 AD2d 969, 969-970 [1993]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). 2014Defendant’s contention that he was unlawfully arrested in his home without an arrest warrant in violation of Payton v New York ( 445 US 573 [1980]) is unpreserved for our review inasmuch as he failed to raise it before County Court (see People v Smith, 55 NY2d 888, 890 [1982]; People v Long, 195 AD2d 610, 610 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 756 [1993]; People v Sneed, 191 AD2d 969, 969-970 [1993]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). | 2 | 3 |
MATTER OF REGAN v. New York State & Local Employees' Retirement Sys.green2 sentences2012Police officers were in defendant’s home pursuant to a valid search warrant and, “[s]ince the requirements for a search warrant were satisfied, there was no constitutional infirmity in the failure of the police to also secure an arrest warrant” (People v Lee, 205 AD2d 708, 709 [1994], lv denied 84 NY2d 828 [1994]; see People v Barfield, 21 AD3d 1396 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 881 [2005]; People v Battista, 197 AD2d 486 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 891 [1993], 83 NY2d 869 [1994]). 2012Police officers were in defendant’s home pursuant to a valid search warrant and, “[s]ince the requirements for a search warrant were satisfied, there was no constitutional infirmity in the failure of the police to also secure an arrest warrant” (People v Lee, 205 AD2d 708, 709 , lv denied 84 NY2d 828 ; see People v Barfield, 21 AD3d 1396 , lv denied 5 NY3d 881 ; People v Battista, 197 AD2d 486 , lv denied 82 NY2d 891 , 83 NY2d 869 ). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Barfieldgreen2 sentences2012Police officers were in defendant’s home pursuant to a valid search warrant and, “[s]ince the requirements for a search warrant were satisfied, there was no constitutional infirmity in the failure of the police to also secure an arrest warrant” (People v Lee, 205 AD2d 708, 709 [1994], lv denied 84 NY2d 828 [1994]; see People v Barfield, 21 AD3d 1396 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 881 [2005]; People v Battista, 197 AD2d 486 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 891 [1993], 83 NY2d 869 [1994]). 2012Police officers were in defendant’s home pursuant to a valid search warrant and, “[s]ince the requirements for a search warrant were satisfied, there was no constitutional infirmity in the failure of the police to also secure an arrest warrant” (People v Lee, 205 AD2d 708, 709 , lv denied 84 NY2d 828 ; see People v Barfield, 21 AD3d 1396 , lv denied 5 NY3d 881 ; People v Battista, 197 AD2d 486 , lv denied 82 NY2d 891 , 83 NY2d 869 ). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Leegreen2 sentences2012Police officers were in defendant’s home pursuant to a valid search warrant and, “[s]ince the requirements for a search warrant were satisfied, there was no constitutional infirmity in the failure of the police to also secure an arrest warrant” (People v Lee, 205 AD2d 708, 709 [1994], lv denied 84 NY2d 828 [1994]; see People v Barfield, 21 AD3d 1396 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 881 [2005]; People v Battista, 197 AD2d 486 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 891 [1993], 83 NY2d 869 [1994]). 2012Police officers were in defendant’s home pursuant to a valid search warrant and, “[s]ince the requirements for a search warrant were satisfied, there was no constitutional infirmity in the failure of the police to also secure an arrest warrant” (People v Lee, 205 AD2d 708, 709 , lv denied 84 NY2d 828 ; see People v Barfield, 21 AD3d 1396 , lv denied 5 NY3d 881 ; People v Battista, 197 AD2d 486 , lv denied 82 NY2d 891 , 83 NY2d 869 ). | 1 | 2 |
People v. Brittongreen1 sentence2020Nevertheless, defendant's contention in appeal No. 1 that he was "unlawfully arrested in his home without an arrest warrant in violation of Payton v New York ( 445 US 573 [1980]) is unpreserved for our review inasmuch as he failed to raise it before [the court]" ( People v Britton , 113 AD3d 1101, 1101 [4th Dept 2014], lv denied 22 NY3d 1154 [2014]; see People v Smith , 55 NY2d 888, 890 [1982]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Rodriguezgreen1 sentence2020We note that defendant failed to make the threshold demonstration of standing inasmuch as he failed to allege a privacy interest in the residence where the arrest occurred ( see generally People v Rodriguez , 69 NY2d 159, 161-163 [1987]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Floresgreen1 sentence2017We decline to exercise our power to review it as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [3] [c]), particularly in view of the fact that the lack of preservation resulted in a hearing record that was not fully developed with respect to that contention (see People v Flores, 83 AD3d 1460, 1460 [2011], affd 19 NY3d 881 [2012]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Martingreen1 sentence2017Defendant’s contention that he was unlawfully arrested in his home without an arrest warrant in violation of Payton v New York ( 445 US 573 [1980]) is not preserved for our review (see CPL 470.05 [2]), because that contention is based on grounds that were not raised before *1876 Supreme Court (see People v Martin, 50 NY2d 1029, 1031 [1980]). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Payton v. New York
green
2 sentences2025Defendant contends that, contrary to the determination of County Court (Watches, J.), the evidence at the suppression hearing established that he was unlawfully arrested without an arrest warrant in violation of Payton v New York ( 445 US 573 [1980]). 2025Defendant contends that, contrary to the determination of County Court (Watches, J.), the evidence at the suppression hearing established that he was unlawfully arrested without an arrest warrant in violation of Payton v New York ( 445 US 573 [1980]). | 9 | 2004–2025 |
People v. Daniels
green
2 sentences2012Police officers were in defendant’s home pursuant to a valid search warrant and, “[s]ince the requirements for a search warrant were satisfied, there was no constitutional infirmity in the failure of the police to also secure an arrest warrant” (People v Lee, 205 AD2d 708, 709 [1994], lv denied 84 NY2d 828 [1994]; see People v Barfield, 21 AD3d 1396 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 881 [2005]; People v Battista, 197 AD2d 486 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 891 [1993], 83 NY2d 869 [1994]). 2012Police officers were in defendant’s home pursuant to a valid search warrant and, “[s]ince the requirements for a search warrant were satisfied, there was no constitutional infirmity in the failure of the police to also secure an arrest warrant” (People v Lee, 205 AD2d 708, 709 , lv denied 84 NY2d 828 ; see People v Barfield, 21 AD3d 1396 , lv denied 5 NY3d 881 ; People v Battista, 197 AD2d 486 , lv denied 82 NY2d 891 , 83 NY2d 869 ). | 2 | 2012–2012 |
People v. Flores
green
1 sentence2017We decline to exercise our power to review it as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [3] [c]), particularly in view of the fact that the lack of preservation resulted in a hearing record that was not fully developed with respect to that contention (see People v Flores, 83 AD3d 1460, 1460 [2011], affd 19 NY3d 881 [2012]). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
People v. Briggs
green
1 sentence1981The facial validity of the arrest warrant precludes the claim for false arrest (see People v Briggs, supra; Nastasi v State of New York, supra). | 1 | 1981–1981 |
People v. Malinsky
green
1 sentence1976That burden, however, has been consistently characterized as merely the necessity of going forward in the first instance with evidence to show that a lawful predicate for the search existed, while the ultimate burden of establishing the claimed illegality thereof usually continues to remain on the defendant seeking to suppress its results (People v Berrios, 28 NY2d 361 ; People v Whitehurst, 25 NY2d 389 ; People v Malinsky, 15 NY2d 86 ). | 1 | 1976–1976 |
People v. Whitehurst
green
1 sentence1976That burden, however, has been consistently characterized as merely the necessity of going forward in the first instance with evidence to show that a lawful predicate for the search existed, while the ultimate burden of establishing the claimed illegality thereof usually continues to remain on the defendant seeking to suppress its results (People v Berrios, 28 NY2d 361 ; People v Whitehurst, 25 NY2d 389 ; People v Malinsky, 15 NY2d 86 ). | 1 | 1976–1976 |
People v. Berrios
green
1 sentence1976That burden, however, has been consistently characterized as merely the necessity of going forward in the first instance with evidence to show that a lawful predicate for the search existed, while the ultimate burden of establishing the claimed illegality thereof usually continues to remain on the defendant seeking to suppress its results (People v Berrios, 28 NY2d 361 ; People v Whitehurst, 25 NY2d 389 ; People v Malinsky, 15 NY2d 86 ). | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.