People v. Chrysler
This text of 288 A.D.2d 318 (People v. Chrysler) 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.
Opinion
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J.), rendered June 16, 1999, convicting her of criminal possession of marihuana in the fourth degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of her omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
[319]*319The County Court properly determined that the City Court of Newburgh had jurisdiction to issue a warrant to search the defendant’s premises in the Town of New Windsor. Therefore, the County Court properly denied that branch of her omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence obtained as a result of the search (see, People v Chrysler, 287 AD2d 7 [decided herewith]).
The defendant’s remaining contention with respect to an immunity agreement involves matters which are dehors the record and, thus, are not reviewable on direct appeal (see, People v Kinchen, 60 NY2d 772). O’Brien, J. P., S. Miller, Smith and Crane, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
288 A.D.2d 318, 733 N.Y.S.2d 612, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10955, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-chrysler-nyappdiv-2001.