From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Tinort

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 18, 2000
272 A.D.2d 206 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Summary

In Tinort, a police officer encountered the defendant in a "drug-prone" building the owner of which had lodged a "trespass affidavit" with the police, and where the officer had made recent arrests.

Summary of this case from People v. Quinones

Opinion

May 18, 2000.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John Bradley, J.), rendered November 10, 1997, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree and attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4 to 8 years, unanimously affirmed.

Donald J. Siewert, for respondent.

Angela Badamo, for defendant-appellant.

Before: Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Lerner, Saxe, JJ.


Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. There is no basis upon which to disturb the court's credibility determinations, which are supported by the record. When the officer observed defendant in a drug-prone building where the owner had executed a "trespass affidavit" requesting police assistance in removing intruders, the officer, who had made several prior arrests in the building, had an "objective credible reason" to ask defendant whether he lived there, which constituted a level one request for information and not a common-law inquiry (see,People v. Hollman, 79 N.Y.2d 181, 191; People v. Greene, 271 A.D.2d 235 [Apr 6 2000], 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891). When defendant claimed to have been visiting a friend, but claimed not to know the friend's name, and supplied an apartment number known by the officer to be non-existent, the officer had probable cause to arrest defendant for criminal trespass (see, People v. Magwood, 260 A.D.2d 246, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 1004; People v. Rodriguez, 159 A.D.2d 201, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 742). Probable cause to arrest for trespass did not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt of all the elements of that crime including scienter.

We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Tinort

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 18, 2000
272 A.D.2d 206 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

In Tinort, a police officer encountered the defendant in a "drug-prone" building the owner of which had lodged a "trespass affidavit" with the police, and where the officer had made recent arrests.

Summary of this case from People v. Quinones
Case details for

People v. Tinort

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. TORNELL TINORT…

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

Date published: May 18, 2000

Citations

272 A.D.2d 206 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
709 N.Y.S.2d 511

Citing Cases

People v. Barksdale

In the first incident, an officer conducting a vertical patrol saw defendant standing in the lobby of a…

United States v. Witty

Mem. 11-12 ("The facts of this case simply do not resemble those in which Courts have found the defendant's…