From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Esposito

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 27, 2003
301 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2001-10886

Argued January 6, 2003.

January 27, 2003.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.), rendered November 19, 2001, convicting him of criminal possession of marijuana in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, 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.

Boies, Schiller Flexner, LLP, New York, N.Y. (William D. Marsillo of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Ann Bordley of counsel), for respondent.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The factual findings and credibility determinations of a hearing court are entitled to great deference on appeal, and will not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761; People v. Jakins, 277 A.D.2d 328; People v. Fryar, 276 A.D.2d 641). The hearing minutes support the denial of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence (see People v. Crespo, 292 A.D.2d 177, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 709; People v. Sergeant, 281 A.D.2d 438; People v. Licurgo, 277 A.D.2d 396).

The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's motion to sever the marijuana possession count from the remaining arson-related counts of the indictment. The proof in support of the arson-related counts would have been material and admissible as evidence-in-chief upon a trial of the drug charge, as the proof related to the reasons for the defendant's arrest (see CPL 200.20[b]; People v. Bongarzone, 69 N.Y.2d 892, 895; People v. Nolan, 277 A.D.2d 400). Moreover, the defendant made various statements at the time of his arrest on the drug charge which would have been material and admissible as evidence-in-chief upon a trial of the arson-related counts (see People v. Nolan, supra; People v. Quartieri, 171 A.D.2d 889).

SANTUCCI, J.P., O'BRIEN, GOLDSTEIN and COZIER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Esposito

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 27, 2003
301 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Esposito

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. FRANK ESPOSITO, appellant

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

Date published: Jan 27, 2003

Citations

301 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
753 N.Y.S.2d 880

Citing Cases

People v. Leggio

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the County Court properly…

People v. Colon

The motion court properly denied defendant's motions to dismiss the indictment and to sever the counts…