From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Nazario

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 23, 1995
220 A.D.2d 695 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

October 23, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Friedman, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court properly denied him a suppression hearing. The defendant sold heroin to an undercover officer during a so-called "buy and bust" operation. The defendant's affirmation in support of his motion did not "contain sworn allegations of fact" as is required under CPL 710.60 (1). The defendant's bare contention that he "[a]t no time * * * engage[d] in any criminal behavior" is precisely the type of legal conclusion the Court of Appeals has stated is insufficient to warrant a suppression hearing, especially in the context of a "buy and bust" operation (see, People v. Mendoza, 82 N.Y.2d 415).

The defendant's remaining contention was not preserved for appellate review and, in any event, does not warrant reversal. Balletta, J.P., Thompson, Ritter and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Nazario

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 23, 1995
220 A.D.2d 695 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Nazario

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ISRAEL NAZARIO…

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

Date published: Oct 23, 1995

Citations

220 A.D.2d 695 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
632 N.Y.S.2d 651

Citing Cases

People v. Singleton

See: People v. Hightower, 85 NY2d 988, 629 NYS2d 164 (1995); People v. Jones, 95 NY2d 721, 723 NYS2d 761…

People v. Loving

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. That branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress…