On summary consideration, order affirmed. We cannot say, as a matter of law, that defendant did not consent to having the police enter his apartment. The presence of the four uniformed officers, the fact that one officer placed his hand on the door to the apartment, and the fact that defendant was clad in his underwear at the time in question are only factors to be taken into account when determining whether consent was voluntarily given. (People v Kuhn,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
PEOPLE v. MURPHY
55 N.Y.2d 819 (1981)
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph Murphy, Appellant.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided December 23, 1981.
Decided December 23, 1981.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Concur: Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
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.
