From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Calloway

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 19, 2010
71 A.D.3d 1493 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

No. KA 07-01125.

March 19, 2010.

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Frank P. Geraci, Jr., J.), rendered December 13, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a nonjury verdict, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (TIMOTHY S. DAVIS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL C. GREEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (NICOLE M. FANTIGROSSI OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Present: Centra, J.P., Fahey, Carni, Green and Pine, JJ.


It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, following a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [former (4)]). We reject the contention of defendant that County Court erred in refusing to suppress evidence obtained by the police during the search of the vehicle that he was driving. Contrary to defendant's contention, the People established at the suppression hearing that the owner's consent "`was in fact voluntarily given, and not the result of duress or coercion, express or implied' by the actions of the law enforcement authorities" ( People v Quagliata, 53 AD3d 670, 671, lv denied 11 NY3d 834, quoting Schneckloth v Bustamonte, 412 US 218, 248).


Summaries of

People v. Calloway

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 19, 2010
71 A.D.3d 1493 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

People v. Calloway

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOSEPH CALLOWAY…

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

Date published: Mar 19, 2010

Citations

71 A.D.3d 1493 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 2313
895 N.Y.S.2d 911

Citing Cases

People v. Binion

t, and they observed his furtive movements and those of the driver. The nonarrest detention was necessary due…