People v. Whitehead

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Whitehead

235 A.D.2d 253, 652 N.Y.S.2d 278, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 225

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

DecidedJanuary 14, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 235 A.D.2d 253 (People v. Whitehead) 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. Whitehead, 235 A.D.2d 253, 652 N.Y.S.2d 278, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 225 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Murray Mogel, J., at suppression hearing; Richard Carruthers, J., at plea and sentence), rendered March 20, 1995, convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s suppression motion was properly denied. The experienced arresting officer’s observation of defendant engage in an exchange of a glassine envelope for money, in a drug-prone area, provided probable cause for defendant’s arrest (People v McRay, 51 NY2d 594). The police testimony was not contrary to human experience (see, People v King, 203 AD2d 199), and we see no reason to disturb the hearing court’s credibility determinations. There is no support in the record for defendant’s claim that the hearing court showed bias against defendant during the conduct of the hearing (see, People v Rosa, 212 AD2d 376, lv denied 85 NY2d 979). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger and Rubin, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Murray Mogel, J., at suppression hearing; Richard Carruthers, J., at plea and sentence), rendered March 20, 1995, convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s suppression motion was properly denied. The experienced arresting officer’s observation of defendant engage in an exchange of a glassine envelope for money, in a drug-prone area, provided probable cause for defendant’s arrest (People v McRay, 51 NY2d 594). The police testimony was not contrary to human experience (see, People v King, 203 AD2d 199), and we see no reason to disturb the hearing court’s credibility determinations. There is no support in the record for defendant’s claim that the hearing court showed bias against defendant during the conduct of the hearing (see, People v Rosa, 212 AD2d 376, lv denied 85 NY2d 979). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D.2d 253, 652 N.Y.S.2d 278, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 225, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-whitehead-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack