People v. Streeter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Streeter

52 A.D.3d 249, 857 N.Y.S.2d 909

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

DecidedJune 5, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 52 A.D.3d 249 (People v. Streeter) 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. Streeter, 52 A.D.3d 249, 857 N.Y.S.2d 909 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (James A. Yates, J., at hearing; Robert H. Straus, J, at jury trial, sentence and resentence), rendered May 18, 2005, as amended May 9, 2006, convicting defendant of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and criminal possession of marijuana in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 4x/2 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations, which are supported by the record (see People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761 [1977]). We do not find the officer’s account of the incident to be so implausible as to require us to reject his testimony.

[250]*250Pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Act, the court reduced defendant’s original sentence from five years to life to 4P-L years, and we perceive no basis for a further reduction. Concur—Tom, J.P, Friedman, Nardelli, Buckley and Renwick, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (James A. Yates, J., at hearing; Robert H. Straus, J, at jury trial, sentence and resentence), rendered May 18, 2005, as amended May 9, 2006, convicting defendant of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and criminal possession of marijuana in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 4x/2 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations, which are supported by the record (see People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761 [1977]). We do not find the officer’s account of the incident to be so implausible as to require us to reject his testimony.

[250]*250Pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Act, the court reduced defendant’s original sentence from five years to life to 4P-L years, and we perceive no basis for a further reduction. Concur—Tom, J.P, Friedman, Nardelli, Buckley and Renwick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.3d 249, 857 N.Y.S.2d 909, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-streeter-nyappdiv-2008.