People v. Miranda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Miranda

293 A.D.2d 344, 740 N.Y.S.2d 194, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3784

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

DecidedApril 16, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 293 A.D.2d 344 (People v. Miranda) 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. Miranda, 293 A.D.2d 344, 740 N.Y.S.2d 194, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3784 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Su[345]*345preme Court, New York County (John Bradley, J., at suppression hearing; Edward McLaughlin, J., at plea and sentence), rendered April 17, 2000, convicting defendant of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of JVa to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s suppression motion was properly denied. The only issue raised on appeal is the reliability of the informant, an arrested drug dealer who advised the police that defendant was his supplier. The informant’s statement was a declaration against his penal interest, as well as being thoroughly corroborated (see, People v Johnson, 66 NY2d 398), particularly by the fact that the informant accurately advised of defendant’s arrival at a particular address, known by the police to be a drug location. Therefore, there was probable cause for defendant’s arrest. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Sullivan, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

Judgment, Su[345]*345preme Court, New York County (John Bradley, J., at suppression hearing; Edward McLaughlin, J., at plea and sentence), rendered April 17, 2000, convicting defendant of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of JVa to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s suppression motion was properly denied. The only issue raised on appeal is the reliability of the informant, an arrested drug dealer who advised the police that defendant was his supplier. The informant’s statement was a declaration against his penal interest, as well as being thoroughly corroborated (see, People v Johnson, 66 NY2d 398), particularly by the fact that the informant accurately advised of defendant’s arrival at a particular address, known by the police to be a drug location. Therefore, there was probable cause for defendant’s arrest. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Sullivan, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

293 A.D.2d 344, 740 N.Y.S.2d 194, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-miranda-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack