Case ID: misc2d_106/html/0440-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Memorandum.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James H. Northrop, Inc., Appellant. The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Norlynn Realty Corp., Appellant. The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jean K. Northrop, Appellant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
    April 17, 1980
    APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Reuben R. Kaufman for appellants. David N. Hilgendorff, Corporation Counsel (Carolyn A. Cairns of counsel), for respondents.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Judgments of conviction unanimously reversed, on the law, fines remitted and accusatory instruments dismissed.

The defendants entered pleas of guilty to section 13-34 (a) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Long Beach in satisfaction of all outstanding charges upon a determination that such provision was constitutional and, after sentencing, appealed from said judgments of conviction.

Section 13-34(a) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Long Beach requires a grantee to obtain a certificate of compliance from the building inspector within 60 days after the transfer of title. The application for a certificate of compliance contains a section wherein an applicant is requested to consent to an inspection of the premises. Since a certificate of compliance signifies that the premises complies with all applicable laws it is apparent that such a certificate would not be issued without an inspection. In view of the foregoing, it is this court’s opinion that section 13-34(a) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Long Beach is unconstitutional as it subjects the grantees to criminal penalties for the failure to permit a warrantless search (see Camara v Municipal Ct., 387 US 523; See v City of Seattle, 387 US 541; Marshall v Barlow’s Inc., 436 US 307; Michigan v Tyler, 436 US 499; cf. Colonnade Corp. v United States, 397 US 72; United States v Biswell, 406 US 311; cf., also, Loventhal v City of Mount Vernon, 51 AD2d 732).

Concur: Pittoni, J. P., Slifkin and O’Gorman, JJ.