From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Webster

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 24, 1990
161 A.D.2d 960 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

May 24, 1990

Appeal from the County Court of Chemung County (Castellino, J.).


Defendant was arrested in connection with a stabbing and attempted robbery, which occurred in the cab of a pickup truck in which defendant and the victim were passengers. The victim escaped by jumping out of the window of the fast-moving vehicle. Defendant claims that the police lacked probable cause to make the warrantless arrest because it was based upon the uncorroborated statement of the driver of the vehicle in which the stabbing occurred. We disagree.

The sworn statement of an identified member of the community attesting to facts which the affiant had directly and personally observed satisfied the probable cause requirement (see, People v Hicks, 38 N.Y.2d 90). The statement in this case was verified by means of the form notice provision contained in Penal Law § 210.45, which is the procedural and functional equivalent of the more traditional type of oath or affirmation (see, People v Sullivan, 56 N.Y.2d 378, 383). This provision "was specifically enacted by the Legislature in order to provide a convenient method of assuring the truthfulness of documents without resort to the often cumbersome procedure of requiring an oath before a notary" (supra, at 383). In addition, because the statement contained a warning that the giving of a false statement constituted a violation of the Penal Law, "[t]he averments made by the informant were * * * declarations against his penal interest" (People v. Hicks, supra, at 94). Accordingly, defendant's claim that the People were required to come forward with additional proof of reliability in order to show probable cause is without merit.

Defendant's excessive sentence argument is also meritless. In light of the vicious and premeditated nature of defendant's conduct, it cannot be said that County Court abused its discretion in sentencing defendant to concurrent prison terms of 6 2/3 to 20 years and 4 to 12 years, which was less than the maximum possible sentence.

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P.J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Webster

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 24, 1990
161 A.D.2d 960 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Webster

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TIMOTHY WEBSTER…

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

Date published: May 24, 1990

Citations

161 A.D.2d 960 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
557 N.Y.S.2d 533

Citing Cases

People v. Taylor

Appeal from the County Court of Chemung County (Castellino, J.). County Court properly found that the…