People v. Ruiz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ruiz

189 A.D.2d 788

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

DecidedJanuary 11, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 189 A.D.2d 788 (People v. Ruiz) 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. Ruiz, 189 A.D.2d 788 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), rendered April 30, 1991, convicting her of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, without a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress evidence obtained from eavesdropping warrants.

[789]*789Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court did not err in summarily denying that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which sought to suppress evidence obtained from eavesdropping warrants. The defense counsel’s affirmation which was submitted in support of the motion failed to contain factual allegations sufficient to warrant a hearing (see, People v Reynolds, 71 NY2d 552, 558; People v Gomez, 67 NY2d 843; People v Frazier, 185 AD2d 360; CPL 710.60 [1], [3]).

We find that the defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Balletta, J. P., Eiber, O’Brien and Santucci, 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 30, 1991, convicting her of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, without a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress evidence obtained from eavesdropping warrants.

[789]*789Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court did not err in summarily denying that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which sought to suppress evidence obtained from eavesdropping warrants. The defense counsel’s affirmation which was submitted in support of the motion failed to contain factual allegations sufficient to warrant a hearing (see, People v Reynolds, 71 NY2d 552, 558; People v Gomez, 67 NY2d 843; People v Frazier, 185 AD2d 360; CPL 710.60 [1], [3]).

We find that the defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Balletta, J. P., Eiber, O’Brien and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

189 A.D.2d 788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ruiz-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack