People v. Eugenio Rivera

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Eugenio Rivera

221 A.D.2d 157, 633 N.Y.S.2d 141, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10745

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

DecidedNovember 2, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 221 A.D.2d 157 (People v. Eugenio Rivera) 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. Eugenio Rivera, 221 A.D.2d 157, 633 N.Y.S.2d 141, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10745 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered March 3, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and upon his guilty plea, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 6½ to 13 years, unanimously affirmed.

The hearing court properly denied the motion to suppress based upon its acceptance of the police officer’s hearing testimony. There was nothing incredible about the officer’s testimony that he could observe defendant passing a white glassine envelope of heroin to a buyer from a distance of approximately 75 feet on a clear sunny day with nothing obstructing his view (cf., People v Basile, 174 AD2d 472, lv denied 78 NY2d 1073). Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and, in any event, without merit. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli 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 (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered March 3, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and upon his guilty plea, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 6½ to 13 years, unanimously affirmed.

The hearing court properly denied the motion to suppress based upon its acceptance of the police officer’s hearing testimony. There was nothing incredible about the officer’s testimony that he could observe defendant passing a white glassine envelope of heroin to a buyer from a distance of approximately 75 feet on a clear sunny day with nothing obstructing his view (cf., People v Basile, 174 AD2d 472, lv denied 78 NY2d 1073). Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and, in any event, without merit. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

221 A.D.2d 157, 633 N.Y.S.2d 141, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10745, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-eugenio-rivera-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack