Opinion
No. 570736/17
09-12-2024
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jermel Coates, Defendant-Appellant.
Unpublished Opinion
PRESENT: Hagler, P.J., Brigantti, Tisch, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Linda Poust Lopez, J., at suppression motion; Harold Adler, J., at trial and sentencing), rendered August 9, 2017, convicting him, after a jury trial, of aggravated driving while intoxicated per se, and imposing sentence.
Judgment of conviction (Linda Poust Lopez, J., at suppression motion; Harold Adler, J., at trial and sentencing), rendered August 9, 2017, affirmed.
The suppression court, adopting the findings of fact and conclusions of law made by a judicial hearing officer, properly denied defendant's suppression motion. There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations, which are supported by the record (see People v Hill, 216 A.D.3d 551 [2023], lv denied 40 N.Y.3d 934 [2023]). Defendant's watery eyes, odor of alcohol on his breath, unsteadiness on his feet, and admission that he had been drinking provided probable cause for his arrest for driving while intoxicated (see People v Dudley, 169 A.D.3d 1059, 1060 [2019], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 1068 [2019]; People v Vargas, 123 A.D.3d 1149, 1150 [2014]; People v Thomas, 68 A.D.3d 482, 483 [2009], lv denied 14 N.Y.3d 806 [2010]).
We reject defendant's contention that the arresting officer's testimony was patently tailored to meet constitutional objections. Since we do not find the officer's testimony to be manifestly untrue, contrary to common experience, self-contradictory, or tailored, we decline to disturb the conclusion that the testimony was credible (see People v Garland, 155 A.D.3d 527, 529 [2017], affd 32 N.Y.3d 1094 [2018], cert denied - U.S. -, 140 S.Ct. 2525 [2020]). "[M]uch weight must be accorded the determination of the suppression court with its peculiar advantages of having seen and heard the witnesses" (People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761 [1977]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur.