People v. Steinberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Steinberg

255 A.D.2d 609, 683 N.Y.S.2d 270, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12848

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

DecidedNovember 30, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 255 A.D.2d 609 (People v. Steinberg) 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. Steinberg, 255 A.D.2d 609, 683 N.Y.S.2d 270, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12848 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunlop, J.), rendered July 28, 1997, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Rosenzweig, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The hearing court’s determination that physical evidence [610]*610was seized from the defendant incidental to his lawful arrest is supported by the record (see, People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759; People v Johnson, 66 NY2d 398; People v Thompson, 132 AD2d 719). The evidence adduced at the hearing established that the police observed the defendant riding a child’s bicycle to several residential dwellings. At the dwellings, he tampered with locked doors, attempted to push open windows, rifled through mail boxes, and either dropped the mail on the floor or returned it to the mail box. At one building, the defendant shoved open the main door, and “jiggled” the doors to two apartments inside. These observations, either standing alone or coupled with the defendant’s implausible explanation that he was dropping off cards in the building, provided the officers with probable cause to arrest the defendant. Copertino, J. P., Sullivan, Krausman and Florio, 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 (Dunlop, J.), rendered July 28, 1997, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Rosenzweig, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The hearing court’s determination that physical evidence [610]*610was seized from the defendant incidental to his lawful arrest is supported by the record (see, People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759; People v Johnson, 66 NY2d 398; People v Thompson, 132 AD2d 719). The evidence adduced at the hearing established that the police observed the defendant riding a child’s bicycle to several residential dwellings. At the dwellings, he tampered with locked doors, attempted to push open windows, rifled through mail boxes, and either dropped the mail on the floor or returned it to the mail box. At one building, the defendant shoved open the main door, and “jiggled” the doors to two apartments inside. These observations, either standing alone or coupled with the defendant’s implausible explanation that he was dropping off cards in the building, provided the officers with probable cause to arrest the defendant. Copertino, J. P., Sullivan, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D.2d 609, 683 N.Y.S.2d 270, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12848, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-steinberg-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack