AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number

The PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MICHAEL KNEITEL, Appellant.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his application to reopen the pretrial suppression hearing. A court may reopen a hearing during trial where, inter alia, the defendant makes a showing "that additional pertinent facts have been discovered by the defendant which he [or she] could not have discovered with reasonable diligence before the determination of the [original suppression] motion" (CPL 710.40). Here, the additional facts concerned the location where the defendant parked his car prior to his arrest. Since this was a fact of which the defendant is presumed to have knowledge, the application to reopen the hearing was properly denied (see People v Young, 278 AD2d 437; People v Hankins, 265 AD2d 572).

The issue of legal sufficiency is unpreserved for appellate review and the defendant's remaining contentions are without merit or do not require reversal.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. KNEITEL
(Oct 17, 2006)