From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Lancaster

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Apr 29, 2015
127 A.D.3d 1235 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

2012-02104, Ind. No. 969/11.

04-29-2015

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Jason LANCASTER, appellant.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Reyna E. Marder of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se. Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Linda Breen of counsel), for respondent.


Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Reyna E. Marder of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se.

Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Linda Breen of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of Supreme Court, Kings County (Guzman, J.), rendered February 16, 2012, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, petit larceny, and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, 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.

The suppression court correctly determined that the police had reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant based upon their observations (see People v. Martinez, 80 N.Y.2d 444, 591 N.Y.S.2d 823, 606 N.E.2d 951 ; People v. Cantor, 36 N.Y.2d 106, 365 N.Y.S.2d 509, 324 N.E.2d 872 ; People v. Lightfoot, 124 A.D.3d 802, 1 N.Y.S.3d 358 ; People v. Williams, 120 A.D.3d 1441, 992 N.Y.S.2d 438 ). The court also correctly determined that the police properly searched the bag that the defendant had been carrying because he abandoned it (see People v. Ramirez–Portoreal, 88 N.Y.2d 99, 643 N.Y.S.2d 502, 666 N.E.2d 207 ; People v. Oliver, 39 A.D.3d 880, 835 N.Y.S.2d 308 ). The defendant failed to establish that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel (see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712–713, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584 ; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400 ).

The defendant's remaining contentions, raised in his pro se supplemental brief, are without merit.

MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, AUSTIN and MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Lancaster

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Apr 29, 2015
127 A.D.3d 1235 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
Case details for

People v. Lancaster

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Jason LANCASTER, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 29, 2015

Citations

127 A.D.3d 1235 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 3566
5 N.Y.S.3d 899

Citing Cases

People v. Hernandez

The defendant failed to demonstrate that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel. The record…