People v. Mercedes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mercedes

157 A.D.2d 748, 551 N.Y.S.2d 788, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 457

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

DecidedJanuary 16, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 157 A.D.2d 748 (People v. Mercedes) 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. Mercedes, 157 A.D.2d 748, 551 N.Y.S.2d 788, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 457 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Appelman, J.), rendered March 21, 1988, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal [749]*749brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record supports the hearing court’s determination that the defendant consented to the search of his luggage, in which a kilo of cocaine was discovered (see, People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759; People v Armstead, 98 AD2d 726; see also, People v Brown, 113 AD2d 893). Accordingly, that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence was properly denied. Thompson, J. P., Brown, Eiber and Balletta, 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 Supreme Court, Queens County (Appelman, J.), rendered March 21, 1988, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal [749]*749brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record supports the hearing court’s determination that the defendant consented to the search of his luggage, in which a kilo of cocaine was discovered (see, People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759; People v Armstead, 98 AD2d 726; see also, People v Brown, 113 AD2d 893). Accordingly, that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence was properly denied. Thompson, J. P., Brown, Eiber and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 A.D.2d 748, 551 N.Y.S.2d 788, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mercedes-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack