People v. Arroyo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Arroyo

223 A.D.2d 714, 637 N.Y.S.2d 934, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 656

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 29, 1996·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J.), rendered September 21, 1994, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and criminally using drug paraphernalia in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record supports the County Court’s determination that the search of the car in which the defendant was riding was proper (see, People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759; People v Ingle, 36 NY2d 413; People v McLaurin, 70 NY2d 779; People v Burke, 146 AD2d 706; People v Blasich, 73 NY2d 673; People v Watson, 213 AD2d 996). Consequently, the County Court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence. Mangano, P. J., Miller, Ritter and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J.), rendered September 21, 1994, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and criminally using drug paraphernalia in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record supports the County Court’s determination that the search of the car in which the defendant was riding was proper (see, People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759; People v Ingle, 36 NY2d 413; People v McLaurin, 70 NY2d 779; People v Burke, 146 AD2d 706; People v Blasich, 73 NY2d 673; People v Watson, 213 AD2d 996). Consequently, the County Court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence. Mangano, P. J., Miller, Ritter and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

People v. Arroyo, 223 A.D.2d 714, 637 N.Y.S.2d 934, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 656 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

223 A.D.2d 714 (People v. Arroyo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related