People v. Calloway

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Calloway

71 A.D.3d 1493, 895 N.Y.S.2d 911

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 19, 2010

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 71 A.D.3d 1493 (People v. Calloway) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Calloway, 71 A.D.3d 1493, 895 N.Y.S.2d 911 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Frank E Geraci, Jr., J.), rendered December 13, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a nonjury verdict, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, following a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [former (4)]). We reject the contention of defendant that County Court erred in refusing to suppress evidence obtained by the police during the search of the vehicle that he was driving. Contrary to defendant’s contention, the People established at the suppression hearing that the owner’s consent “ ‘was in fact voluntarily given, and not the result of duress or coercion, express or implied’ by the actions of the law enforcement authorities” (People v Quagliata, 53 AD3d 670, 671 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 834 [2008], quoting Schneckloth v Bustamonte, 412 US 218, 248 [1973]). Present — Centra, J.P., Fahey, Carni, Green and Pine, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Frank E Geraci, Jr., J.), rendered December 13, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a nonjury verdict, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, following a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [former (4)]). We reject the contention of defendant that County Court erred in refusing to suppress evidence obtained by the police during the search of the vehicle that he was driving. Contrary to defendant’s contention, the People established at the suppression hearing that the owner’s consent “ ‘was in fact voluntarily given, and not the result of duress or coercion, express or implied’ by the actions of the law enforcement authorities” (People v Quagliata, 53 AD3d 670, 671 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 834 [2008], quoting Schneckloth v Bustamonte, 412 US 218, 248 [1973]). Present — Centra, J.P., Fahey, Carni, Green and Pine, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 A.D.3d 1493, 895 N.Y.S.2d 911, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-calloway-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack