People v. Dunn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dunn

253 A.D.2d 712, 680 N.Y.S.2d 80, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9793

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

DecidedSeptember 29, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 253 A.D.2d 712 (People v. Dunn) 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. Dunn, 253 A.D.2d 712, 680 N.Y.S.2d 80, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9793 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Corriero, J.), rendered December 19, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree and one count of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of IV2 to 3 years, IV2 to 3 years and 2 to 4 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s suppression motion was properly denied. The police conducted a proper request for information, which was triggered by their observation of defendant’s car filled with smoke, parked with its lights on and engine running in a dark, deserted area known to be a location for abandoned and stolen cars, and, as such, was supported by an objective, credible reason.

The court properly exercised its discretion in allowing the prosecution to cross-examine defendant about his motive for misleading the arresting officers as to his name, since such inquiry did not implicate the court’s prior Sandoval ruling concerning use of aliases. Even if there were a modification of the prior ruling, such modification would not have deprived de[713]*713fendant of a fair trial. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Wallach and Williams, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Corriero, J.), rendered December 19, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree and one count of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of IV2 to 3 years, IV2 to 3 years and 2 to 4 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s suppression motion was properly denied. The police conducted a proper request for information, which was triggered by their observation of defendant’s car filled with smoke, parked with its lights on and engine running in a dark, deserted area known to be a location for abandoned and stolen cars, and, as such, was supported by an objective, credible reason.

The court properly exercised its discretion in allowing the prosecution to cross-examine defendant about his motive for misleading the arresting officers as to his name, since such inquiry did not implicate the court’s prior Sandoval ruling concerning use of aliases. Even if there were a modification of the prior ruling, such modification would not have deprived de[713]*713fendant of a fair trial. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Wallach and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D.2d 712, 680 N.Y.S.2d 80, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9793, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dunn-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack