From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Soto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 20, 1993
199 A.D.2d 440 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

December 20, 1993

Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Pirro, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record reflects that the defendant's arrest was supported by probable cause. Further, the officers' entry into the apartment where the defendant was hiding was permissibly based upon the prior consent of a resident of the apartment (see, People v Adams, 53 N.Y.2d 1, 8, cert denied 454 U.S. 854; People v Cosme, 48 N.Y.2d 286; People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759; People v Greenberg, 187 A.D.2d 528; People v Auxilly, 173 A.D.2d 627). The hearing court properly denied suppression of a handgun found in open view (see, People v Wilson, 191 A.D.2d 528; People v Reilly, 155 A.D.2d 961), and also two other handguns removed from a bag that the defendant was clutching when the police lawfully placed him under arrest (see, People v Johnson, 154 A.D.2d 395; People v Castro, 130 A.D.2d 501; People v Brown, 184 A.D.2d 647).

We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit (see, People v Mitchell, 39 N.Y.2d 173, cert denied 426 U.S. 953; People v Wilson, supra; People v Cornielle, 172 A.D.2d 681). Thompson, J.P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Soto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 20, 1993
199 A.D.2d 440 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Soto

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. GILBERT SOTO, Also…

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

Date published: Dec 20, 1993

Citations

199 A.D.2d 440 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
608 N.Y.S.2d 87

Citing Cases

People v. Webb

Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the hearing court properly concluded that neither the photographic…

People v. Merle

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