People v. Zilk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Zilk

114 A.D.2d 985, 495 N.Y.S.2d 924, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54034

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

DecidedNovember 18, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 114 A.D.2d 985 (People v. Zilk) 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. Zilk, 114 A.D.2d 985, 495 N.Y.S.2d 924, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54034 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dubin, J.), rendered May 12, 1982, convicting him of attempted burglary in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

[986]*986The evidence, as adduced at the Mapp hearing, supported the ruling that the police had "reasonable suspicion”, permitting the stop and detention of the defendant (see, People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210; People v Cantor, 36 NY2d 106). The inconsistencies between an officer’s testimony at the Mapp hearing and that at an earlier preliminary hearing were so inconsequential that the court did not err in finding him a credible witness. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Niehoff and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dubin, J.), rendered May 12, 1982, convicting him of attempted burglary in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

[986]*986The evidence, as adduced at the Mapp hearing, supported the ruling that the police had "reasonable suspicion”, permitting the stop and detention of the defendant (see, People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210; People v Cantor, 36 NY2d 106). The inconsistencies between an officer’s testimony at the Mapp hearing and that at an earlier preliminary hearing were so inconsequential that the court did not err in finding him a credible witness. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Niehoff and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.2d 985, 495 N.Y.S.2d 924, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54034, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-zilk-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack