People v. Darbasie
This text of 128 A.D.3d 489 (People v. Darbasie) 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
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Brenda Soloff, J.), rendered June 12, 2003, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of six years to life, unanimously affirmed.
*490 The court properly denied summarily defendant’s motion to controvert a search warrant. Defendant was not entitled to a Franks/Alfinito hearing (see Franks v Delaware, 438 US 154 [1978]; People v Alfinito, 16 NY2d 181 [1965]), because he failed to make the necessary “substantial preliminary showing that a false statement knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was included by the affiant in the warrant affidavit” (Franks, 438 US at 155-156). Defendant only challenged the veracity of the information provided to the police officer affiant by an undercover detective, and not that of the affiant himself (see People v Slaughter, 37 NY2d 596, 600 [1975]; People v Solimine, 18 NY2d 477 [1966]).
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.
We have considered and rejected the arguments raised in defendant’s supplemental pro se brief. Concur — Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Andrias, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
128 A.D.3d 489, 8 N.Y.S.3d 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-darbasie-nyappdiv-2015.