People v. Fayton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fayton

276 A.D.2d 339, 715 N.Y.S.2d 2, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10649

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

DecidedOctober 17, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 276 A.D.2d 339 (People v. Fayton) 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. Fayton, 276 A.D.2d 339, 715 N.Y.S.2d 2, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10649 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Leibovitz, J.), rendered May 7, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (three counts) and endangering the welfare of a child, and sentencing him to two terms of 5 to 10 years, three terms of 2 to 6 years and a term of 1 year, all to run concurrently, unanimously affirmed.

The hearing court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress a gun found during a search of an apartment shared by the complainant and defendant. The record supports the court’s finding that the search was based on valid consent. The complainant, who had previously reported to the police that defendant had menaced her with a gun, informed the police that there was a gun in the apartment, gave the gun’s precise location, and later expressly consented to a search of the apartment. The police properly relied on the complainant’s apparent authority to consent to a search of her entire apartment, including the room in which defendant was located, there being no [340]*340indication that the room was exclusively defendant’s (see, People v Figueroa, 267 AD2d 183, lv denied 94 NY2d 919). The record also supports the court’s finding that the search was justified as an emergency action (see, People v Adams, 236 AD2d 293, lv denied 90 NY2d 854). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Buckley, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Leibovitz, J.), rendered May 7, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (three counts) and endangering the welfare of a child, and sentencing him to two terms of 5 to 10 years, three terms of 2 to 6 years and a term of 1 year, all to run concurrently, unanimously affirmed.

The hearing court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress a gun found during a search of an apartment shared by the complainant and defendant. The record supports the court’s finding that the search was based on valid consent. The complainant, who had previously reported to the police that defendant had menaced her with a gun, informed the police that there was a gun in the apartment, gave the gun’s precise location, and later expressly consented to a search of the apartment. The police properly relied on the complainant’s apparent authority to consent to a search of her entire apartment, including the room in which defendant was located, there being no [340]*340indication that the room was exclusively defendant’s (see, People v Figueroa, 267 AD2d 183, lv denied 94 NY2d 919). The record also supports the court’s finding that the search was justified as an emergency action (see, People v Adams, 236 AD2d 293, lv denied 90 NY2d 854). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

276 A.D.2d 339, 715 N.Y.S.2d 2, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10649, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fayton-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack