People v. Salas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Salas

29 A.D.3d 451, 814 N.Y.S.2d 524

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

DecidedMay 23, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 29 A.D.3d 451 (People v. Salas) 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. Salas, 29 A.D.3d 451, 814 N.Y.S.2d 524 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena K. Uviller, J.), rendered July 14, 2004, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion challenging the search warrant. We have reviewed the unredacted search war[452]*452rant affidavit, and we conclude that the confidential informant’s testimony (see People v Taylor, 73 NY2d 683, 688 [1989]) and the supporting affidavit clearly established probable cause under the Aguilar-Spinelli test (see Spinelli v United States, 393 US 410 [1969]; Aguilar v Texas, 378 US 108 [1964]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Marlow and Malone, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena K. Uviller, J.), rendered July 14, 2004, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion challenging the search warrant. We have reviewed the unredacted search war[452]*452rant affidavit, and we conclude that the confidential informant’s testimony (see People v Taylor, 73 NY2d 683, 688 [1989]) and the supporting affidavit clearly established probable cause under the Aguilar-Spinelli test (see Spinelli v United States, 393 US 410 [1969]; Aguilar v Texas, 378 US 108 [1964]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Marlow and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.3d 451, 814 N.Y.S.2d 524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-salas-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack