People v. Grimaldi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Grimaldi

304 A.D.2d 589, 756 N.Y.S.2d 896, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3695

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

DecidedApril 7, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 304 A.D.2d 589 (People v. Grimaldi) 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. Grimaldi, 304 A.D.2d 589, 756 N.Y.S.2d 896, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3695 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered December 12, 2001, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, [590]*590upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, without a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In support of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence, the defendant failed to raise a factual dispute requiring a hearing (see People v Mendoza, 82 NY2d 415, 432-433 [1993]; People v Reynolds, 71 NY2d 552 [1988]; People v Smith, 212 AD2d 552 [1995]; People v Arroya, 268 AD2d 287 [2000]). Thus, the Supreme Court properly summarily denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion (see CPL 710.60 [1], [3] [b]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Adams, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered December 12, 2001, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, [590]*590upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, without a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In support of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence, the defendant failed to raise a factual dispute requiring a hearing (see People v Mendoza, 82 NY2d 415, 432-433 [1993]; People v Reynolds, 71 NY2d 552 [1988]; People v Smith, 212 AD2d 552 [1995]; People v Arroya, 268 AD2d 287 [2000]). Thus, the Supreme Court properly summarily denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion (see CPL 710.60 [1], [3] [b]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Adams, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

304 A.D.2d 589, 756 N.Y.S.2d 896, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-grimaldi-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack