People v. Williams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Williams

18 A.D.3d 241, 793 N.Y.S.2d 913, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5009

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

DecidedMay 10, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 18 A.D.3d 241 (People v. Williams) 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. Williams, 18 A.D.3d 241, 793 N.Y.S.2d 913, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5009 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura E. Drager, J., at suppression hearing; Daniel E FitzGerald, J., at plea and sentence), rendered October 24, 2002, convicting defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing her to a term of three years to life, 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]). The police testimony contained only minor inconsistencies, and there is no indication that it was tailored to meet constitutional requirements. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Tom, Saxe, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura E. Drager, J., at suppression hearing; Daniel E FitzGerald, J., at plea and sentence), rendered October 24, 2002, convicting defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing her to a term of three years to life, 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]). The police testimony contained only minor inconsistencies, and there is no indication that it was tailored to meet constitutional requirements. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Tom, Saxe, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.3d 241, 793 N.Y.S.2d 913, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5009, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-williams-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack