People v. Osmond

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Osmond

109 A.D.2d 897, 487 N.Y.S.2d 91, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47424

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 109 A.D.2d 897 (People v. Osmond) 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. Osmond, 109 A.D.2d 897, 487 N.Y.S.2d 91, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47424 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pincus, J.), rendered May 10,1983, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant failed to meet his burden of showing a reasonable expectation of privacy in the “gypsy cab” of which he was an occupant at the time of his arrest, and therefore lacks standing to challenge the subsequent search of that vehicle (People v Cacioppo, 104 AD2d 559). Defendant’s argument is, in any event, without merit (see, People v Belton, 55 NY2d 49). We further find that the misconduct of the prosecutrix was, in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt, harmless, and that the trial court did not, as defendant contends, unduly inteiject itself into the proceedings. Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Brown and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pincus, J.), rendered May 10,1983, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant failed to meet his burden of showing a reasonable expectation of privacy in the “gypsy cab” of which he was an occupant at the time of his arrest, and therefore lacks standing to challenge the subsequent search of that vehicle (People v Cacioppo, 104 AD2d 559). Defendant’s argument is, in any event, without merit (see, People v Belton, 55 NY2d 49). We further find that the misconduct of the prosecutrix was, in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt, harmless, and that the trial court did not, as defendant contends, unduly inteiject itself into the proceedings. Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Brown and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 A.D.2d 897, 487 N.Y.S.2d 91, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-osmond-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack