People v.Ralfopoulos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v.Ralfopoulos

274 A.D.2d 437, 710 N.Y.S.2d 121, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7692

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

DecidedJuly 10, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 274 A.D.2d 437 (People v.Ralfopoulos) 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.Ralfopoulos, 274 A.D.2d 437, 710 N.Y.S.2d 121, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7692 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Finnegan, J.), rendered January 8, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the defendant’s plea is vacated, that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence is granted, Count 15 of the indictment is dismissed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for the purpose of entering an order in its discretion pursuant to CPL 160.50.

The evidence adduced at the hearing failed to establish that the police had probable cause to arrest the defendant for possession of the bullets found in the car in which he was riding (see generally, People v Manini, 79 NY2d 561, 572-574). Since the police did not have probable cause to arrest the defendant, the gun found in his possession during a search incident to his arrest should have been suppressed. As the only charge against the defendant in the indictment was for criminal possession of [438]*438a weapon in the third degree, his conviction must be vacated and that count of the indictment dismissed. Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Thompson and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Finnegan, J.), rendered January 8, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the defendant’s plea is vacated, that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence is granted, Count 15 of the indictment is dismissed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for the purpose of entering an order in its discretion pursuant to CPL 160.50.

The evidence adduced at the hearing failed to establish that the police had probable cause to arrest the defendant for possession of the bullets found in the car in which he was riding (see generally, People v Manini, 79 NY2d 561, 572-574). Since the police did not have probable cause to arrest the defendant, the gun found in his possession during a search incident to his arrest should have been suppressed. As the only charge against the defendant in the indictment was for criminal possession of [438]*438a weapon in the third degree, his conviction must be vacated and that count of the indictment dismissed. Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Thompson and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

274 A.D.2d 437, 710 N.Y.S.2d 121, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-vralfopoulos-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack