New York Court of Appeals, 2016

People v. Bilal

New York Court of Appeals · Decided March 31, 2016 · Abdus, Difiore, Fahey, Garcia, Pigott, Rivera, Salaam, Stein

27 N.Y.3d 961; 49 N.E.3d 1155

Cases that cite this one

21 later published cases cite this decision.

CARTER, ROBERT, PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
People v. Carter (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
People v. Carter (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
People v. Wyatt (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2026)
People v. Dearstyne (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
People v. McCollum (New York Criminal Court 2024)
People v. McCollum (New York Criminal Court 2024)
People v. Moore (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
People v. Favreau (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
People v. Boyd (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
People v. Sisto (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
People v. Crumpler (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
People v. Coffee (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
People v. Peters (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
SYMONDS, JR., FREDERICK, PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
People v. Stocum (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
People v. Gray (N.Y. 2016)
People v. Symonds (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
People v. Symonds (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
People v. Zeh (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
People v. Zeh (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be modified by remitting to Supreme Court for a suppression hearing. In the event that defendant prevails at the suppression hearing, a new trial should be ordered; alternatively, in the event that the People prevail, the judgment should be amended to reflect that result. As so modified, the order should be affirmed.

*962On this record and in light of the issues framed by the parties in connection with defendant’s CPL 440.10 motion, we conclude that defendant was denied the effective assistance of counsel. In this case, defendant was indicted on a charge of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (see Penal Law § 265.03 [3]), and defense counsel failed to move to suppress the gun that was recovered during defendant’s encounter with the police. Defendant established, through his counsel’s affidavit, that there was no “strategic or other legitimate explanation[ ]” (People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]) for defense counsel’s failure to file a motion to suppress. Thus, we conclude that counsel did not provide defendant with meaningful representation under these particular circumstances. Accordingly, defendant is entitled to a suppression hearing and, if he prevails at the hearing, a new trial, but if the People prevail, the judgment should be amended to reflect that result (see People v Clermont, 22 NY3d 931, 934 [2013]; People v Millan, 69 NY2d 514, 521-522 [1987]).

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Pigott, Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey and Garcia concur.

Order modified by remitting to Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.