ALBANY – A judge’s independent test of a vehicle taillight without informing either the police or the motorist before he granted the driver’s motion to suppress evidence was found improper by a state appeals court.
Albany Acting Supreme Court Justice Dan Lamont’s “improper experiment,” conducted without the knowledge of either side, violated the concept that while the “trier of fact may apply logic, common sense and everyday experience to interpret the admitted evidence,” he may not “engage in conduct that tends to put the factfinder in possession of evidence that was not introduced,” the Appellate Division, Third Department, ruled last week in People v. Allen, 104192.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
