Opinion
11-17-2017
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Martin GRISWOLD, Defendant–Appellant.
Frank H. Hiscock Legal Aid Society, Syracuse (Sara A. Goldfarb of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (Nicole K. Intschert of Counsel), for Respondent.
Frank H. Hiscock Legal Aid Society, Syracuse (Sara A. Goldfarb of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant.
William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (Nicole K. Intschert of Counsel), for Respondent.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, CURRAN, AND WINSLOW, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his guilty plea of, inter alia, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree ( Penal Law § 265.03[3] ). Contrary to defendant's contention, we conclude that County Court did not err in refusing to suppress evidence obtained during the execution of a search warrant inasmuch as the search warrant was issued with probable cause. "Probable cause does not require proof sufficient to warrant a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt but[, rather, it] merely [requires] information sufficient to support a reasonable belief that an offense has been or is being committed or that the evidence of a crime may be found in a certain place" ( People v. Bigelow, 66 N.Y.2d 417, 423, 497 N.Y.S.2d 630, 488 N.E.2d 451 [1985] ). Further, " [p]robable cause may be supplied, in whole or part, through hearsay information" (id.). The record establishes that the confidential informant had some basis of knowledge, and the confidential informant's reliability was established because his statement to the police was corroborated by independently verified details about the shooting that precipitated the search warrant (see People v. DiFalco, 80 N.Y.2d 693, 696–697, 594 N.Y.S.2d 679, 610 N.E.2d 352 [1993] ; People v. Elwell, 50 N.Y.2d 231, 237, 428 N.Y.S.2d 655, 406 N.E.2d 471 [1980] ).
Contrary to defendant's further contention, the bargained-for sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.