From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gilpin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 13, 1995
216 A.D.2d 62 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

June 13, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, Harold Rothwax, J., Edwin Torres, J.


Because the pen register at issue had the capacity to be modified to overhear conversations, and was installed without prior authorization by warrant, all evidence obtained from it should have been suppressed ( People v. Bialostok, 80 N.Y.2d 738). However, the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court's finding that any error caused by warrantless installation of a pen register which was capable of being modified, but had not been modified, was harmless. Although there may have been conflicting inferences to be drawn from the record, the weighing of the evidence is primarily for the trier of facts, and its conclusion should be honored unless unsupportable as a matter of law ( see, People v. Smith, 104 A.D.2d 682, 684). We decline to set this determination aside as against the weight of the evidence.

We have considered and rejected the defendant's additional claims.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Gilpin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 13, 1995
216 A.D.2d 62 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Gilpin

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EUGENE GILPIN…

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

Date published: Jun 13, 1995

Citations

216 A.D.2d 62 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
627 N.Y.S.2d 678

Citing Cases

People v. Salzarulo

Rather, other Departments "are entitled to have their rulings accorded great respect and weight but adhering…

People v. Medure

The Court suppressed the pen register evidence both as direct evidence and as derivative evidence to support…