UNITED STATES v. LILLA

Nos. 404, 382-87, 391, 394, 461, Dockets 82-1210, 82-1212, 82-1214, 82-1216, 82-1218, 82-1220, 82-1222, 82-1224, 82-1226, 82-1260.

699 F.2d 99 (1983)

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Michael LILLA, Mark Lilla, Robert Lilla, Douglas Pintka, Raymond C. Colehammer, Christopher Burch, Richard Strack, Michael Bouck, Frank Benson, and Peter Santos, Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Decided January 27, 1983.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Stephen R. Coffey, O'Connell & Aronowitz, P.C., Albany, N.Y. (John R. Massaroni, Parisi, DeLorenzo, Gordon, Pasquariello & Weiskopf, P.C., Schenectady, N.Y., of counsel), for appellants Mark Lilla, Christopher Burch and Douglas Pintka.

John R. Massaroni, Parisi, DeLorenzo, Gordon, Pasquariello & Weiskopf, P.C., Schenectady, N.Y. (Stephen R. Coffey, O'Connell & Aronowitz, P.C., Albany, N.Y., of counsel), for appellant Robert Lilla.

John K. Sharkey, Higgins, Roberts, Beyerl & Coan, P.C., Schenectady, N.Y., for appellant Michael Bouck.

E. Stewart Jones, Jr., Troy, N.Y. (Leonard W. Krouner, Jeffrey Sherrin, Albany, N.Y., of counsel), for appellant Raymond Colehammer.

George J. Camino, Schenectady, N.Y., for appellant Michael Lilla.

Paul V. French, Albany, N.Y. (Paul E. Cheeseman, Albany, N.Y., on the brief, Thomas P. O'Sullivan, Albany, N.Y., of counsel), for appellant Strack.

Jerome K. Frost, Troy, N.Y., for appellants Benson and Santos.

George Yanthis, Asst. U.S. Atty., Albany, N.Y. (Frederick J. Scullin, Jr., U.S. Atty., N.D.N.Y., Albany, N.Y., on the brief), for appellee.

Before FEINBERG, Chief Judge, OAKES, Circuit Judge, and BONSAL, District Judge.


OAKES, Circuit Judge:

This appeal presents the issue whether the affidavit of a New York state trooper applying for an eavesdropping warrant provided sufficient information that normal investigative procedures reasonably appeared unlikely to succeed if tried. We hold that the affidavit was insufficient under both N.Y.Crim.Proc.Law §§ 700.15(4) and 700.20(2), (3), as well as 18 U.S.C. § 2518(1)(c), and, with one exception, reverse the appellants' convictions...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases