People v. Wells

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Wells

95 A.D.3d 696, 944 N.Y.S.2d 560

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

DecidedMay 24, 2012

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 95 A.D.3d 696 (People v. Wells) 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. Wells, 95 A.D.3d 696, 944 N.Y.S.2d 560 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

[697]*697Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Seth L. Marvin, J.), rendered June 11, 2008, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of operating a motor vehicle while ability impaired by drugs, driving while ability impaired by the combined influence of drugs or of alcohol and any drug or drugs, and sentencing him to a term of six months, unanimously affirmed.

The court erred in relying on the inventory search doctrine in denying suppression of physical evidence recovered from the car defendant was driving, because the People did not introduce any evidence to establish a valid inventory search (see People v Johnson, 1 NY3d 252, 256 [2003]). However, there was overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, independent of the physical evidence at issue. Although the harmless error rule regarding suppression issues does not normally apply to cases where a defendant pleads guilty (People v Grant, 45 NY2d 366, 378-380 [1978]), the particular circumstances of this case warrant a finding of harmless error (see People v Lloyd, 66 NY2d 964 [1985]; People v Beckwith, 303 AD2d 594, 595 [2003]; People v Strain, 238 AD2d 452 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 864 [1997]).

We have considered and rejected defendant’s pro se claims. Concur — Gonzalez, EJ., Andrias, Saxe, DeGrasse and Román, JJ.

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

[697]*697Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Seth L. Marvin, J.), rendered June 11, 2008, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of operating a motor vehicle while ability impaired by drugs, driving while ability impaired by the combined influence of drugs or of alcohol and any drug or drugs, and sentencing him to a term of six months, unanimously affirmed.

The court erred in relying on the inventory search doctrine in denying suppression of physical evidence recovered from the car defendant was driving, because the People did not introduce any evidence to establish a valid inventory search (see People v Johnson, 1 NY3d 252, 256 [2003]). However, there was overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, independent of the physical evidence at issue. Although the harmless error rule regarding suppression issues does not normally apply to cases where a defendant pleads guilty (People v Grant, 45 NY2d 366, 378-380 [1978]), the particular circumstances of this case warrant a finding of harmless error (see People v Lloyd, 66 NY2d 964 [1985]; People v Beckwith, 303 AD2d 594, 595 [2003]; People v Strain, 238 AD2d 452 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 864 [1997]).

We have considered and rejected defendant’s pro se claims. Concur — Gonzalez, EJ., Andrias, Saxe, DeGrasse and Román, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

95 A.D.3d 696, 944 N.Y.S.2d 560, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-wells-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack