The trial court erred in summarily denying defendant's motion for a suppression hearing on the ground that defendant had no standing to challenge the seizure of evidence at the premises in question. The affirmation in support of the motion indicated that defendant and a codefendant were, at the time of the seizure and for several weeks prior thereto, the exclusive occupants of the premises in question, with the consent of the tenant of record. Although defendant's claim that...
Let's get started
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.