People v. O'Quinn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. O'Quinn

123 A.D.2d 332, 506 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60108

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 8, 1986·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), rendered April 2, 1985, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Di Tucci, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence and his statements to the police.

Judgment affirmed.

Under the circumstances, the police were justified in stopping the defendant, who matched the description of a suspect which had been obtained from a police radio transmission and a civilian informant (see, People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210). Upon stopping the defendant, a sawed-off shotgun was observed in plain view and was therefore lawfully seized (see, People v Messam, 112 AD2d 449). Since the arrest of the defendant for possession of the weapon was lawful, his argument that his statements were the product of an unlawful arrest must fail (cf. Wong Sun v United States, 371 US 471). Brown, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Kunzeman, 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 (Rotker, J.), rendered April 2, 1985, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Di Tucci, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence and his statements to the police.

Judgment affirmed.

Under the circumstances, the police were justified in stopping the defendant, who matched the description of a suspect which had been obtained from a police radio transmission and a civilian informant (see, People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210). Upon stopping the defendant, a sawed-off shotgun was observed in plain view and was therefore lawfully seized (see, People v Messam, 112 AD2d 449). Since the arrest of the defendant for possession of the weapon was lawful, his argument that his statements were the product of an unlawful arrest must fail (cf. Wong Sun v United States, 371 US 471). Brown, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

People v. O'Quinn, 123 A.D.2d 332, 506 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60108 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

123 A.D.2d 332 (People v. O'Quinn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related