From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cruz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 6, 1990
158 A.D.2d 293 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

February 6, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (John Bradley, J.).


Mindful that much weight is to be accorded the determination of the suppression court with its peculiar advantage of having seen and heard the witnesses (People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761), we do not interfere with the hearing court's factual findings crediting the arresting officer's testimony that he stopped, frisked and arrested defendant only after observing him with a gun. This testimony was not so inconsistent with prior statements the officer made in police department reports and before the Grand Jury as to demonstrate that it was tailored to meet the constitutional objection that defendant was stopped, frisked and arrested for no other reason than that he was observed in a gift shop purchasing a holster.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Carro, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Cruz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 6, 1990
158 A.D.2d 293 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Cruz

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JULIO CRUZ, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Feb 6, 1990

Citations

158 A.D.2d 293 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
550 N.Y.S.2d 700

Citing Cases

People v. Grajales

The testimony of the officer contained some inconsistencies, and it should be noted that the suppression…

People v. Smith

The sole witness at the suppression hearing was the arresting officer who testified that while he was…