People v. Tyler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tyler

94 A.D.3d 480, 941 N.Y.S.2d 496

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

DecidedApril 5, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 94 A.D.3d 480 (People v. Tyler) 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. Tyler, 94 A.D.3d 480, 941 N.Y.S.2d 496 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ruth Pickholz, J., at suppression hearing; Richard D. Carruthers, J, at plea and sentencing), rendered May 20, 2010, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony drug offender, to a term of two years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations. There was probable cause for defendant’s arrest (see generally People v Bigelow, 66 NY2d 417, 423 [1985]). Defendant met a very detailed description of a person who sold drugs to an undercover officer, and defendant appeared at the prearranged time and place of a prospective drug sale that was clearly linked to the completed sale. The brief detention by the police of another suspect was satisfactorily explained. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels and Román, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ruth Pickholz, J., at suppression hearing; Richard D. Carruthers, J, at plea and sentencing), rendered May 20, 2010, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony drug offender, to a term of two years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations. There was probable cause for defendant’s arrest (see generally People v Bigelow, 66 NY2d 417, 423 [1985]). Defendant met a very detailed description of a person who sold drugs to an undercover officer, and defendant appeared at the prearranged time and place of a prospective drug sale that was clearly linked to the completed sale. The brief detention by the police of another suspect was satisfactorily explained. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels and Román, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 A.D.3d 480, 941 N.Y.S.2d 496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tyler-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack