From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Milliner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 23, 1989
146 A.D.2d 717 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

January 23, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Finnegan, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The arresting officer testified that he observed the defendant leaning against a telephone pole in a high-crime area and that the defendant, who was wearing a tee shirt underneath an open fur coat, had a large bulge at his waistline. When the defendant pulled the tee shirt down, apparently in response to the officer's approach, the outline of what appeared to be a weapon was revealed, thus justifying the ensuing patdown of the bulge and retrieval of what proved to be a .45 caliber, semiautomatic pistol (see, People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759; cf., CPL 140.50, [3]). We discern no basis for disturbing the suppression court's finding that the officer's testimony was credible (see, People v Africk, 107 A.D.2d 700; cf., People v Prochilo, supra). Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Milliner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 23, 1989
146 A.D.2d 717 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

People v. Milliner

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RICHARD MILLINER, Also…

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

Date published: Jan 23, 1989

Citations

146 A.D.2d 717 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

The sole witness at the suppression hearing was the arresting officer who testified that while he was…

People v. Nazario

Moreover, an omission of fact at a prior time is insufficient for impeachment purposes unless it is shown…