 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
OPINION
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
INFORMANT DEFENDANT JUDGE EAVESDROPPING WARRANT CPL COURT SUPPRESS MOTION APPELLATE DIVISION DETERMINATION EVIDENCE LAW CARBUCCIA WARRANT JUDGE PARENTI NY2D STATUTE ONTARIO COUNTY SEARCH WARRANTS DISCLOSURE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT INTERCEPTION AFFIDAVIT EXISTENCE ARRAIGNMENT FAILURE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE WARRANT AUTHORIZING SCHULZ PROVISIONS |
THE PEOPLE &C., APPELLANT, v. JOHN LIBERATORE, RESPONDENT.
79 N.Y.2d 208, 590 N.E.2d 219, 581 N.Y.S.2d 634 (1992).
February 25, 1992
4 No. 19
Decided February 25, 1992
_________________________________________________________________
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
Brian D. Dennis, for Appellant.
David Lee Foster, for Respondent.
ALEXANDER, J.:
The People appeal by leave of a Judge of this Court from three orders
of the Appellate Division which reversed, on the law, three judgments
of Ontario County court convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of
first degree criminal possession of a controlled substance, third
degree criminal sale of a controlled substance and first degree
criminal possession of stolen property and granted defendant's motion
to suppress all evidence obtained as the result of eavesdropping
warrants and search warrants. The Appellate Division concluded that
the People failed to comply with the notice mandate of CPL 700.70.
Inasmuch as we disagree for the reasons that follow, there should be a
reversal.
I
Defendant's conviction in Ontario County for drug- related offenses
grew out of a narcotics trafficking investigation in adjoining Wayne
County. An eavesdropping warrant authorizing the interception of
conversations on a telephone listed to Noemi Dessis-Carbuccia
("Carbuccia warrant") was issued on May 30, 1984 by Wayne County Judge
Carmen R. Parenti. The warrant application included the affidavit of
State Police Investigator William Freeman and numerous attachments,
including a seven page statement of a confidential informant. Because
the investigation was continuing and the identity of the informant was
readily discernible from the detailed information contained in the
statement, Judge Parenti directed that the informant's statement be
sealed to protect the informant and avoid compromising the on-going
investigation. Thus, the warrant specifically directed that the
statement remain sealed "until further order of a court having
jurisdiction to order disclosure thereof." The warrant provided
SNIPPETS:
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
