People v. Sepulveda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sepulveda

143 A.D.2d 379, 532 N.Y.S.2d 299, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9163

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

DecidedSeptember 12, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 143 A.D.2d 379 (People v. Sepulveda) 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. Sepulveda, 143 A.D.2d 379, 532 N.Y.S.2d 299, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9163 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Chetta, J.), rendered January 30, 1987, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress certain statements and physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In the instant case, the police officer was given a detailed description, by an identified citizen, of two men whom the citizen had seen just a few minutes earlier, attempting to steal a neighbor’s car. While the witness and the police were discussing the incident on the street, the defendant rounded the corner with a shoulder bag underneath his arm, and was immediately identified as one of the alleged perpetrators. The defendant then fled the scene but was apprehended by the police after a short chase. Contrary to the defendant’s argument, under these circumstances the police had probable cause to arrest the defendant for the crime of attempted grand larceny (People v Marin, 91 AD2d 616).

The defendant’s final argument, that the search by the police of the shoulder bag was unlawful, is also without merit (People v Smith, 59 NY2d 454). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Kunzeman and Weinstein, 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 (Chetta, J.), rendered January 30, 1987, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress certain statements and physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In the instant case, the police officer was given a detailed description, by an identified citizen, of two men whom the citizen had seen just a few minutes earlier, attempting to steal a neighbor’s car. While the witness and the police were discussing the incident on the street, the defendant rounded the corner with a shoulder bag underneath his arm, and was immediately identified as one of the alleged perpetrators. The defendant then fled the scene but was apprehended by the police after a short chase. Contrary to the defendant’s argument, under these circumstances the police had probable cause to arrest the defendant for the crime of attempted grand larceny (People v Marin, 91 AD2d 616).

The defendant’s final argument, that the search by the police of the shoulder bag was unlawful, is also without merit (People v Smith, 59 NY2d 454). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Kunzeman and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 A.D.2d 379, 532 N.Y.S.2d 299, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sepulveda-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack