From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 5, 1996
230 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

August 5, 1996


Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), rendered March 1, 1995, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence. The very specific, detailed information provided by the anonymous tip, as corroborated by independent police observation, gave the detectives reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle in which the defendant was a passenger (see, People v Batash, 163 A.D.2d 399; People v Olsen, 93 A.D.2d 824).

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declining to impose a sanction for the lost Rosario material, inasmuch as the defendant failed to demonstrate that he was prejudiced (see, People v Collins, 203 A.D.2d 888; compare, People v Wallace, 76 N.Y.2d 953). Mangano, P.J., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 5, 1996
230 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Jones

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CURTIS JONES, Appellant

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

Date published: Aug 5, 1996

Citations

230 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
646 N.Y.S.2d 62

Citing Cases

People v. Walker [4th Dept 1999

Memorandum: The record supports the determination of the suppression court and the trial court that the…

People v. Walker

Memorandum: The record supports the determination of the suppression court and the trial court that the…