[Editors note: Welcome to the inaugural edition of the the amNew York Law Bench Report, where we will feature notable rulings from state and federal courts, brief news bulletins that impact the judiciary and announcements from judges’ chambers. Are we missing anything? Contact editor-in-chief Andrew Denney at adenney@schnepsmedia.com]
A ‘plain smell exception’?: Judge rejects defendant’s argument that officers found corpse in his refrigerator via an illegal search
A Brooklyn man convicted of murdering an acquaintance and hiding his dismembered corpse in his refrigerator for almost two years failed in his challenge to the police search of his apartment that turned up the victim’s remains.
On Oct. 9, a jury convicted defendant Nicholas McGee of first-degree murder and concealment of a human corpse. Prosecutors allege that, one day in March 2022, McGee got into a dispute with an acquaintance who was staying in his apartment that ultimately turned deadly.
According to court papers, the acquaintance died after getting bludgeoned with a hammer and stabbed and slashed “scores of times.” McGee then disremembered the body and stashed various parts in his refrigerator and freezer.
On Jan. 22, 2024, court papers state, New York Police Department officers were dispatched to McGee’s apartment to follow up on a Crime Stoppers tip that a corpse was being stored there. At the time, McGee was living in Virginia and had not resided in the Brooklyn apartment for four months.
Heather Stines, McGee’s wife, answered the door and an officer “immediately recognized the smell of death” from inside the apartment, Acting Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Judge John T. Hecht wrote in a recent ruling in McGee’s case.
Stines offered to show police around the “dirty and roach-infested apartment” that was lit by a single light in the living room. In the kitchen, officers found a working refrigerator that was taped shut.
Stines became aggressive when the officers attempted to open the refrigerator, claiming they needed a warrant to do so. She also insisted that it was full of rotten food, and that the stink might fill the apartment.
“But the apartment already stank. More to the point, who knowingly keeps rotten food in a taped-up refrigerator?” Hecht wrote.
Ruling on McGee’s motion to suppress the officers’ discovery of the victim’s remains, Hecht said in his Nov. 3 ruling that, as an initial matter, McGee did not have an expectation of privacy at the apartment, as he wasn’t residing there at the time.
Beyond even the defendant had standing to challenge the search, the judge continued, an officer recognized the smell of rotting human flesh. Citing case law, Hecht said that courts have recognized a ‘plain view’ exception allowing for police searches when evidence of a crime might be smelled but not explicitly seen.
“Given these facts, what the police encountered when they entered [McGee’s apartment] qualifies for what is generally known as the ‘plain view’ exception to the warrant requirement — though perhaps in this case it may more aptly be called the ‘plain smell’ exception,” Hecht wrote.
The case is captioned People v. McGee, 2025 NY Slip Op 25239.
Judge sends ‘dangerous dogs’ for evaluation, possible euthanasia
A Manhattan judge ruled that a pair of dogs that attacked three small dogs in two Central Park incidents must be surrendered to the city and potentially euthanized.
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Phaedra F. Perry-Bond found defendant Joseph Columbus’ pitbull mixes to be “dangerous dogs” under New York’s Agriculture and Markets Law, based on two separate, unprovoked attacks on other smaller dogs in the park — one of which resulting in the death of a Shih Tzu-mix named Grover.
Columbus is directed to surrender the dogs, Rambo and Zoey, within three days. If he fails to do so, the NYPD or Sheriff’s office can seize the dogs, so they can be evaluated by a behaviorist, with the defendant responsible for all associated costs. The court reserves the right to order euthanasia based on this evaluation.
“The Court will need to take draconian measures to ensure protection of the public consistent with the directives,” Perry-Bond wrote in her decision.
Columbus was also held liable for the $21,697.26 veterinary expenses for the two Shih Tzu-mix Chuckie and Grover. The court did not award reimbursement to the other owners whose chihuahua Penny was attacked because they received pet insurance and GoFundMe reimbursements for the bills.
The case is captioned Allen v. Columbus, 156803/2025
Antique dealers settle ivory scuffle with New York State
Following a seven-year legal battle, a group of art and antique dealers reached a settlement with New York’s conservation authority over statewide restrictions on ivory sales that the plaintiffs argued were preempted by federal law.
U.S. District Judge Lorna G. Schofield of the Southern District of New York dismissed the case in a Nov. 6 order following the parties’ settlement.
Earlier this year, the U.S Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said the Endangered Species Act doesn’t preempt the law in question. However, the state’s ban on stores physically displaying ivory for which they don’t have a sales licence violates the First Amendment, the circuit ruled, kicking the case back to the Southern District.
Schofield’s ruling followed a Nov. 5 letter from the New York Attorney General’s Office informing the court that a settlement in principle had been reached. “[W]we have received approval from both the New York Office of the Attorney General and DEC to proceed with the proposed settlement,” wrote Kyle Burns, an assistant attorney general in the office’s environmental protection bureau.
New York enacted the ivory statute in 2014 as a measure to curb illegal ivory trading in New York City and to aid in the conservation of elephants. The law contains an exception for “bona fide antique” ivory pieces, which must be at least 100 years old — with evidence of provenance — and contain less than 20% ivory by volume.
The case is captioned The Art & Antique Dealers League of Am., Inc. v. Seggos 18-cv-2504
