| People v Freeman |
| 2017 NY Slip Op 02090 [29 NY3d 926] |
| March 23, 2017 |
| Court of Appeals |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| As corrected through Wednesday, April 26, 2017 |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Darrion B. Freeman, Appellant. |
Decided March 23, 2017
People v Freeman, 141 AD3d 1164, reversed.
Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (James A. Hobbs of counsel), for appellant.
Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Robert J. Shoemaker of counsel), for respondent.
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, defendant's plea vacated, that portion of his motion which requested suppression of tangible property and statements [*2]obtained following the entry into defendant's residence granted, the first and second counts of the indictment dismissed, and the case remitted to County Court for further proceedings on the third count of the indictment. Applying the factors outlined by this Court in People v Gonzalez (39 NY2d 122, 127 [1976]), we hold, consistent with the reasoning of the Appellate Division dissent, that the record lacks support for the conclusion of the courts below that defendant voluntarily consented to the entry and search of his home.
Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey, Garcia and Wilson concur.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, defendant's plea vacated, that portion of his motion which requested suppression of tangible property and statements obtained following entry into defendant's residence granted, the first and second counts of the indictment dismissed, and case remitted to County Court, Monroe County, for further proceedings on the third count of the indictment, in a memorandum.