People v. Kasse

N.Y.

Court: New York Court of Appeals

Citations: 22 N.Y.3d 1142, 7 N.E.3d 500, 984 N.Y.S.2d 287

Decision Date: 3/27/2014

Jurisdiction: NY

Bluebook Citation: People v. Kasse, 22 N.Y.3d 1142, 7 N.E.3d 500, 984 N.Y.S.2d 287 (2014)

More Cases: N.Y. decisions from 2014

Citation analytics

How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

★Highly CitedTop 7% most-cited · cited by 70 decisions

Citing decisions

Authorities cited

Courts citing

Citations by decade

2010s2020s

Courts citing this case

N.Y. App. Term.62

N.Y. App. Div.3

N.Y. Crim. Ct.3

N.Y. App. Term1

Most recently cited by10

2025People v. Alvarenga-Mendez
2025People v. Carlos-Valencia (Adelaido) N.Y. App. Term.
2025People v. Galindo (Rogelio) N.Y. App. Term.
2024People v. Pointer N.Y. App. Div.
2024People v. Lin (Wendy) N.Y. App. Term.
2024People v. Miller (Jamel) N.Y. App. Term.
2023People v. Pierre (Rodney) N.Y. App. Term.
2022People v. Ba (Mamadou) N.Y. App. Term.
2021People v. Bennett (Larry) N.Y. App. Term.
2021People v. Ramirez (Juan) N.Y. App. Term.

Cites 2 cases

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.

Opinion

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Harouna Kasse, Appellant.

Judges

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rtvera and Abdus-Salaam concur.

Attorneys

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York City (Michael J. McLaughlin of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York City (Sheryl Feldman of counsel), for respondent.

majority

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Term should be affirmed.

The misdemeanor complaint was jurisdictionally valid because it described facts of an evidentiary nature establishing reasonable cause to believe that defendant engaged in unlicensed general vending in violation of section 20-453 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York. The arresting police officer observed defendant at a specified time and public location standing behind a suitcase with more than 10 handbags, which he offered for sale to various individuals, and defendant failed to produce a vendor’s license at the officer’s request. Those allegations were sufficient for pleading purposes since they provided adequate notice to enable defendant to prepare a defense and invoke his protection against double jeopardy (see e.g. People v Dreyden, 15 NY3d 100, 103 [2010]; People v Allen, 92 NY2d 378, 385 [1998]).

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rtvera and Abdus-Salaam concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, in a memorandum.