People v. Parris

17 A.D.3d 121, 791 N.Y.S.2d 822, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3444
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Parris. Read the opinion of the Court — 26 A.D.3d 393

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Micki A. Scherer, J., on motion; Bruce Allen, J., at plea and sentence), rendered April 18, 2002, convicting defendant of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him to a term of one year, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion without a hearing. The Feople set forth detailed information as to the predicate for defendant’s arrest, and defendant’s papers did not raise a factual dispute requiring a hearing (see People v Mendoza, 82 NY2d 415 [1993]). Furthermore, defendant did not raise his present contention that the police were not justified in conducting a body cavity search incident to an arrest for [122]*122marijuana possession. We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Ellerin, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

People v. Parris, 17 A.D.3d 121, 791 N.Y.S.2d 822, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3444 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

17 A.D.3d 121 (People v. Parris) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Mendoza
624 N.E.2d 1017 (New York Court of Appeals, 1993)