People v. Fields

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fields

294 A.D.2d 916, 741 N.Y.S.2d 462, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4393

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

DecidedMay 3, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 294 A.D.2d 916 (People v. Fields) 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. Fields, 294 A.D.2d 916, 741 N.Y.S.2d 462, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4393 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County (Fisher, J.), entered April 13, 2000, convicting defendant after a jury trial of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts).

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [1], [former (4)]). Supreme Court properly determined that defendant lacked standing to challenge the search of his girlfriend’s apartment and denied defendant’s suppression motion without conducting a hearing. Defendant’s motion papers, which included an affirmation of defense counsel alleging that defendant was an “occasional resident” of the apartment and kept some clothing there, failed to contain sworn allegations of fact sufficient to raise an issue of fact with respect to standing (see CPL 710.60 [3] [b]; People v Thurman, 262 AD2d 987, Iv denied 94 NY2d 830; see also People v Conway, 277 AD2d 1020, Iv denied 96 NY2d 782; People v Bostick, 151 AD2d 768, 770; People v McGaha, 144 AD2d 388, 389). In view of defendant’s extensive criminal record, we conclude that the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County (Fisher, J.), entered April 13, 2000, convicting defendant after a jury trial of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts).

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [1], [former (4)]). Supreme Court properly determined that defendant lacked standing to challenge the search of his girlfriend’s apartment and denied defendant’s suppression motion without conducting a hearing. Defendant’s motion papers, which included an affirmation of defense counsel alleging that defendant was an “occasional resident” of the apartment and kept some clothing there, failed to contain sworn allegations of fact sufficient to raise an issue of fact with respect to standing (see CPL 710.60 [3] [b]; People v Thurman, 262 AD2d 987, Iv denied 94 NY2d 830; see also People v Conway, 277 AD2d 1020, Iv denied 96 NY2d 782; People v Bostick, 151 AD2d 768, 770; People v McGaha, 144 AD2d 388, 389). In view of defendant’s extensive criminal record, we conclude that the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 916, 741 N.Y.S.2d 462, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fields-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack