People v. Mena

87 A.D.3d 946, 930 N.Y.2d 7
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 29, 2011·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

At the suppression hearing, the police officers testified that during a lawful car stop, they detected the odor of marijuana emanating from the vehicle; moreover, the codefendant admitted to police officers that he and defendant had been smoking marijuana earlier in the day in the car on the way to New York from Atlantic City. Accordingly, the police clearly had probable cause to search the vehicle under the automobile exception, and this included a search of the trunk (see United States v Ross, 456 US 798, 825 [1982]; People v Langen, 60 NY2d 170, 180-182 [1983], cert denied 465 US 1028 [1984]; People v Hughes, 68 [947]*947AD3d 894 [2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 841 [2010]). Concur — Tom, J.E, Catterson, Renwick, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

People v. Mena, 87 A.D.3d 946, 930 N.Y.2d 7 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

87 A.D.3d 946 (People v. Mena) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Ponder
2021 NY Slip Op 02880 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Jones
54 Misc. 3d 536 (Livingston County Court, 2016)
People v. Ramos
122 A.D.3d 462 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)