People v. Soto

297 A.D.2d 581, 747 N.Y.2d 173, 747 N.Y.S.2d 173, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8769
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 24, 2002·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Defendant’s suppression motion was properly denied. Drugs were recovered from defendant incident to a lawful arrest. Defendant committed a violation in the presence of police officers, who properly elected to make an arrest rather than issuing a summons because defendant carried no identification and stated that he was homeless. Defendant argues that the Equal Protection Clause requires the police, in making such a decision, to treat a defendant’s residence in a homeless shelter the same as any other verifiable address. We need not decide that issue because there is no evidence that defendant ever informed the police that he lived in a shelter. The document that defendant showed to the police apparently related to free food and did not establish that he was a shelter resident at the time of his arrest.

As conceded by the People, defendant’s conviction for criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, a lesser included offense of fourth-degree possession, should be vacated. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Buckley, Ellerin and Marlow, JJ.

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

People v. Soto, 297 A.D.2d 581, 747 N.Y.2d 173, 747 N.Y.S.2d 173, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8769 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

297 A.D.2d 581 (People v. Soto) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Miranda
974 N.E.2d 661 (New York Court of Appeals, 2012)