People v. McKethan

225 A.D.2d 800, 640 N.Y.2d 570, 640 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3236
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 25, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 225 A.D.2d 800 (People v. McKethan) 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. McKethan, 225 A.D.2d 800, 640 N.Y.2d 570, 640 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3236 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

Contrary to the defendant’s argument on appeal, there was probable cause for the police to effect a warrantless arrest of the defendant. It is well settled that probable cause to arrest exists when the facts and circumstances, viewed together, would lead a reasonable person, possessing the same expertise as the arresting officer, to conclude that an offense was committed and that the person arrested was the perpetrator (see, People v Carrasquillo, 54 NY2d 248; People v Javier, 175 AD2d 182; People v Rivera, 166 AD2d 678).

In the course of their investigation of the crime, the police obtained a detailed description of the murder suspect and of the victim’s distinctively colored suede jacket. The description was then relayed to police officers of the Port Authority Bus Terminal, where police reasonably believed the suspect might go. The following day, a man matching the description and carrying a jacket resembling the victim’s jacket was seen by police near the Port Authority Bus Terminal. Under these circumstances, there was probable cause to believe that the defendant had committed the crime for which he was arrested (see, People v Bigelow, 66 NY2d 417; People v Carrasquillo, supra).

The defendant’s remaining contentions in his supplemental pro se brief are either without merit or involve matters outside the record which cannot be considered on direct appeal from [801]*801the judgment of conviction (see, People v Colon, 138 AD2d 392). O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. McKethan
59 A.D.3d 463 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
McKethan v. Mantello
522 F.3d 234 (Second Circuit, 2008)
People v. August
33 A.D.3d 1046 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
People v. Harmon
293 A.D.2d 303 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
People v. Baker
244 A.D.2d 496 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
People v. O'Connor
242 A.D.2d 908 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
People v. Jones
236 A.D.2d 846 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
People v. Cruz
234 A.D.2d 558 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
People v. Larkin
234 A.D.2d 481 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
225 A.D.2d 800, 640 N.Y.2d 570, 640 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mckethan-nyappdiv-1996.